Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Keeping a record on employees emails is invading the privacy of the employees and stating that the company does not think the employees as a trustworthy. Having emails monitored will make the sending of resources more such as money. Hence the company has to choose with the time or the money to send resource on.
By keeping a constant report of every employee's email will consume more time than they actually consume and the new system has to be invoked to keep a check the same. This will consume more capital of the company. Instead, they can send a temporary email of maximum of 1 week. Thenceforth the resources that the company has an email on the employee's id will automatically get deleted after a week or time they have set it on.
It also defines that the company does not trust the employee's ability to handle the important resources that they have provided. For example, giving work on a given resource and constantly interfering in that will also make employees frustrated and will result in degrading the efficiency of them.
Besides keeping a check on emails will improve more security of the firm. It will also help in making the case in the courtroom less solid by not providing the opponent case with the proof their proposed question on the company. But by this, the ill effect will be of not having the track of the resources sent to the employees and sometimes the proof nonguiltiness. For example, a firm has reported of stealing their resources by other rivalry firms that they have used by publicizing the secret to the public or by some other mean.
I would like to close by refuting the author by not monitoring the employee's email by showing trust in them as that will help the firm only in the long run. I also believe that invading someone's privacy is not a right given to anyone and the relationship of employee and the company becomes loose ends.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 140, Rule ID: DT_JJ_NO_NOUN[1]
Message: Probably a noun is missing in this part of the sentence.
...company does not think the employees as a trustworthy. Having emails monitored will make the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 234, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ending of resources more such as money. Hence the company has to choose with the time...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 341, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employees'' or 'employee's'?
Suggestion: employees'; employee's
...es that the company has an email on the employees id will automatically get deleted after...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 53, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employees'' or 'employee's'?
Suggestion: employees'; employee's
...nes that the company does not trust the employees ability to handle the important resourc...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, hence, so, then, as to, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 19.5258426966 20% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 58.6224719101 82% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 12.9106741573 8% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1559.0 2235.4752809 70% => OK
No of words: 333.0 442.535393258 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.68168168168 5.05705443957 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50993570729 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 215.323595506 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.459459459459 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 489.6 704.065955056 70% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.7140530544 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.933333333 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.93333333333 5.21951772744 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200859713495 0.243740707755 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0782518965414 0.0831039109588 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.050795694897 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129327335719 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0570370956164 0.0667264976115 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.86 12.1639044944 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.38 8.38706741573 88% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 100.480337079 56% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.