The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing During the past year Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on the job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant where the work shifts are one hour shorter than our

Essay topics:

The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing.

"During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

The vice president of Quiot Manufacturing claims that the Quiot should shorten the work shifts by one hour and suggests several reasons that upholds his/her claim. However, the memo is rife with holes and assumptions and such flaws needs to be eliminated in order to warrant the vice president's claim. The mistakes he/she made in the memo would be discussed with further details below.
First of all, the vice president reasons that experts stated that majority of the on-the-job accidents are due to fatigue and sleep deprivation and this would also be the case in Quiot Manufacturing. However, he/she needs to clarify exactly how many experts mentioned such statement. If there were only two to three experts among many experts, then such statement might be negligible enough. Furthermore, even if many on-the-job accidents are due to fatigue and sleep deprivation, this may not have been the reason why more on-the-job accidents occurred in Quiot Manufacturing than in Panoply Industries plant. There could be various factors that causes on-the-job accidents, such as lack of caution in using the machinery or heavy work-load. Especially, if lack of caution in using machinery was the reason why such on-the-job accidents occurred, then the vice president would prioritize in educating the workers about safety instead of reducing the work shift by one hour.
In addition, the vice president assumes that the cause of on-the-job accidents would be the same in Quiot Manufacturing as in Panoply Industries plant. However, the two places are resided in a different location and does not contain the same workers, which indicates that it has a high possibility that the causes of the on-the-job accidents might differ. Maybe heavy work-load is the cause of on-the-job accidents in Quiot Manufacturing, unlike Panoply Industries plant. If this is the case, then the vice president should first provide less amount of work to the workers before reducing their work shift by one hour. If the vice president wishes to use this evidence to bolster his/her claim, he/she would have to provide additional information about the causes of on-the-job accidents in both Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industries plant.
Lastly, the author of the memo assumes that the productivity in Quiot Manufacturing is quite low due to multiple on-the-job accidents. However, maybe the reason more accidents occurred in Quiot Manufacturing compared to Panoply Industries plant because of heavy work-load. The workers might have had to manufacture much more products than the Panoply Industries in the same amount of time. Having multiple on-the-job accidents does not always indicate in low productivity, so the vice president would have to provide numerical information about the productivity in both Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industries plant in order to use such evidence as proof of upholding his/her claim.
To sum up, even though the vice president's claim and the evidences that upholds such claim might seem plausible, through thorough investigation and reading the memo in various perspectives, it is confirmed that it the claim is unwarranted. In order for the vice president to effectively maintain his/her claim, he/she would have to eliminate the mistakes of providing obscure information and making haste assumptions.

Votes
Average: 5.3 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 569, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...formation about the productivity in both Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industri...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, so, then, in addition, such as, first of all, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 80.0 55.5748502994 144% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2798.0 2260.96107784 124% => OK
No of words: 521.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37044145873 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77759609229 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88197423174 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.393474088292 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 868.5 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.7775940679 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.9 119.503703932 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.05 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.35 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.357492031873 0.218282227539 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136703437336 0.0743258471296 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.097452112061 0.0701772020484 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.223916895865 0.128457276422 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100956984036 0.0628817314937 161% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 15 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 529 350
No. of Characters: 2742 1500
No. of Different Words: 197 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.796 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.183 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.827 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 186 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 160 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 90 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.45 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.622 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.394 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.394 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.187 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5