A recent study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that employees with paid sick leave are 28% less likely to be involved in a work-related accident than employees that do not receive payment for the sick leave. Researchers hypothesize that employees with unpaid sick leave feel pressured to work during the time of illness for fear of lack of pay. On-the-job accidents are then spurred by impaired judgment or motor skills due to illness or illness related medication. The highest risk- occupations, such as construction, showed the highest discrepancy between paid and unpaid leave.
The argument states that employees with unpaid sick leave are more susceptible than work-related accident than paid sick leave. The author represented some evidence about the research and survey. But there is a discrepancy of overall statistical data and between unpaid and paid sick leave.
Firstly, the author claims that unpaid sick leave is 28% more susceptible than the paid sick leave in work-related accident. But, is the data estimated for the same level of the job? There is no evidence in the presented claim; moreover, the evidence has no unequivocal employee number, ratio and based on other related evidence that supports the claim. So, without clear statistical result, the claim is totally vague and ambiguous.
Secondly, the researcher claims that unpaid sick leave feel pressure for cut off of pay. But, the actual explanation has not supported this claim. For instance, in a company, there is a various level of an employee like a manager, assistant manager, blue-collar job holder and then a clerk and also temporarily job holder. The permanent employee of a company if got sick barley the company cut his or her wages. But, for temporary employee sometimes company cut pays. So, the claim of the author is weakening the hypothesis.
Again, the survey claims that there is a discrepancy between paid and unpaid leave in highest risk occupation when the accident happens. But, the researcher does not explain the job title. Such as, if the employee works in a construction side but works in a front desk what type of accident will occur there. So, the overall hypothesis is not clear, skeptical and lack of depth.
Finally, conclude that the author should provide more evidence to strengthen the claim otherwise the hypothesis will not validate.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 290 350
No. of Characters: 1430 1500
No. of Different Words: 137 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.127 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.931 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.623 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 98 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 76 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 56 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.111 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.324 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.317 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.523 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.061 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 84, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'in the highest'.
Suggestion: in the highest
...screpancy between paid and unpaid leave in highest risk occupation when the accident happe...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 238, Rule ID: SIDE_SITE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'site'?
Suggestion: site
...if the employee works in a construction side but works in a front desk what type of ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 55.5748502994 41% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1478.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 290.0 441.139720559 66% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09655172414 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66433707201 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 204.123752495 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 454.5 705.55239521 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.7836671745 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.1111111111 119.503703932 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1111111111 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
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: 0.299370202696 0.218282227539 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.091576598914 0.0743258471296 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100001601421 0.0701772020484 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165678236995 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106275043987 0.0628817314937 169% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 98.500998004 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.