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.

Stating the fewer on-the-job accidents of Panoply Industries, the author argues that Quiot Manufacturing should shorten each of its three work shifts by one hour to increase its productivity. Even though this claim seems plausible at first glance, some wrong assumptions lead me to question the validity of this argument.

First, the author believes that the number of on-the-job accidents last year could be representative. However, one year might be not enough period to analyze the exact trend of accidents at Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industries. For example, the increase of on-the-job accidents of the last year could be an aberration in the long-term trend. To support his conclusion, the author has to give more long-term records of on-the-job accidents at Quiot Manufacturing. Additionally, if there were few accidents before last year at the two companies, the 30% of accidents might be negligible. For example, if there were only three accidents at Panoply Industries, just four cases of accidents at Quiot Manufacturing can mean 30% more accidents. But, in this case, 30% is an insignificant number. To bolster his argument, a more exact number of on-the-job accidents in Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industries.

Second, the author assumes that Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply Industries have the same working circumstance. To validate his assertion, he should provide more information about the working condition of the two companies such as the kind of product, the average age of employees, and their exact manufacturing process. If Quiot Manufacturing usually makes the more complicated product, there might be more accidents than Panoply Industries. Similarly, If their employee is much older than Panoply Industries or their working condition is more dangerous, it also could cause more accidents. However, we cannot find any information about these aspects in this article. It makes the author's argument weaken critically.

Third, the author assumes that a shorter time of work helps to reduce on-the-job accidents. However, there is no evidence that the hour of work shift can affect the accidents. For more specific, he quotes an expert's opinion that fatigue and sleep deprivation can cause many on-the-job accidents. But the relationships between fatigue and sleep shortage and the reduced time of work shift are unclear. For instance, if the employees use their time saved by shorter work shifts for their hobbies or social activities such as outdoor leisure or eating out and drinking with their friends, they would be more tired than before. In this case, the author's recommendation would be ineffective improving the company's productivity.

In conclusion, this memo has many flaws, a lack of specific data, and unpersuasive assumptions. To strengthen the author's argument, he should provide more precise information about long-term trends and the exact number of on-the-job accidents, working conditions of two companies, and the evidence that employee will spend their reduced working time for adequate rest.

Votes
Average: 5.8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 682, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e aspects in this article. It makes the authors argument weaken critically. Third, t...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 209, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'experts'' or 'expert's'?
Suggestion: experts'; expert's
...idents. For more specific, he quotes an experts opinion that fatigue and sleep deprivat...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 643, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...re tired than before. In this case, the authors recommendation would be ineffective imp...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 115, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rsuasive assumptions. To strengthen the authors argument, he should provide more precis...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, similarly, so, then, third, as to, for example, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, such as

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2587.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 471.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49256900212 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0084603546 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447983014862 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 785.7 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 51.4710679249 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.791666667 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.625 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 16.0 6.88822355289 232% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325568798053 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104420936641 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0827948195518 0.0701772020484 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176669036017 0.128457276422 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0776705627034 0.0628817314937 124% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.5979740519 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 471 350
No. of Characters: 2516 1500
No. of Different Words: 202 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.659 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.342 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.89 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 183 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 153 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 81 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.625 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.066 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.708 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.344 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.531 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.147 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5