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

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 asseverates that Quiot Manufacturing will be able to increase productivity by implementing a reduced working time and it will also lead to a reduction in the accidents while working. However, the assertion is lacking evidence and needs to provide additional evidence.

First of all, it overlooks the possibility that the expert's advice might be wrong. For instance, they may be unaware of the different conditions that the two industries have: the Quiot factories may be hazardous and thus prone to accidents compared to the Panoply industry. Moreover, the employees of Quiot may have not received proper safety educations before working in the field. Hence, to further support the argument, the mavericks should be given information about the comparison between Quiot and Panoply. If indeed both companies were under the same conditions, it would be sound to argue that fatigue was the essential reason for accidents.

Next, concluding that a decrease in hazards will lead to a productivity increase seems hasty. It could be true that the productivity increases because of employees are less worried and are able to fully focus on their jobs. Nevertheless, the vice president did not provide any information about such matters and thus this assertion is incoherent. To make is more cogent, he should provide the correlation between the number of mishaps and the productivity of the workers by for example, explaining that the total workers available at a certain time will increase due to less patients recovering from the troubles.

Last but no least, it seems unreasonable to retrench all three work shifts to ensure safety. For instance, shifts that are during the daytime are unlikely to hamper a worker's respite. On the other hand, shifts during the evening and midnights may be problematic and directly related to the worker's rest, resulting in sleep deprivation. Consequently, the vice president should provide just evidence to persuade us to believe that all shifts require a contracted time by explaining that even in the daytime, it takes long hours to drive home since the factory is alienated from major towns.

In conclusion, the author's contention is missing various evidence to be persuasive. Professionals should be given information about the different situations of the two companies, should substantiate the relation between mishaps and productivity, and finally condone that all shifts require a lessened work time.

Votes
Average: 6.1 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 53, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'experts'' or 'expert's'?
Suggestion: experts'; expert's
..., it overlooks the possibility that the experts advice might be wrong. For instance, th...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 571, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun patients is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... at a certain time will increase due to less patients recovering from the troubles. ...
^^^^
Line 13, column 168, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'workers'' or 'worker's'?
Suggestion: workers'; worker's
...ng the daytime are unlikely to hamper a workers respite. On the other hand, shifts duri...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...m major towns. In conclusion, the authors contention is missing various evidence ...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, look, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, thus, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, first of all, on the other hand

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2090.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 389.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37275064267 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92151211663 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53470437018 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 650.7 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.6662574973 57.8364921388 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.941176471 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8823529412 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9411764706 5.70786347227 192% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.137443676334 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.040891792382 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0408898346152 0.0701772020484 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0773380962089 0.128457276422 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0335139995955 0.0628817314937 53% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?

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

Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 389 350
No. of Characters: 2029 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.441 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.216 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.848 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.882 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.719 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.882 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.294 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.547 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.062 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5