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.
People should have their privacy and should be able to decide who they want to share their thought with. In lieu of this, should Company management conduct routine monitoring of their employee's email correspondence in order to reduce waste of resources as well as protect the company from lawsuits? I totally disagree, with three reasons.
First of all, Company management monitoring employee's e-mail correspondence would be a breach of the employee's privacy. For example, an employee may be sharing his/her personal life with someone via e-mail and if such conversation is being monitored by the Company's management, It will not be fair to the employee's as anybody monitoring the conversation would know about such employee's personal life without the employee's permission. Such policy as monitoring employee's e-mail correspondence will not be fair to anyone that wants to share something personal or confidential.
Also, there won't be freedom of expression if employees know that their email correspondence is being monitored by the management. For example, an employer may want to communicate his or her exact mind to someone through email and because he or she knows that his or her conversation is being monitored, he or she may decide to communicate something totally different from his or her original thought. This could lead to an artificial conversation on mail and also, the employees may look for another platform to communicate their original thought and hereby forfeit the reason for which the management is conducting routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence.
Finally, a company management may argue that monitoring all employee email correspondence will protect the company from lawsuit. But, a situation where the employee are communicating through other means outside the company's monitoring scope will still put such firm in danger.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 102, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employees'' or 'employee's'?
Suggestion: employees'; employee's
...correspondence would be a breach of the employees privacy. For example, an employee may b...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 412, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employees'' or 'employee's'?
Suggestion: employees'; employee's
...uch employees personal life without the employees permission. Such policy as monitoring e...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, if, look, may, so, still, well, for example, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 58.6224719101 60% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1580.0 2235.4752809 71% => OK
No of words: 291.0 442.535393258 66% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4295532646 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.55969084622 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05411489068 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 215.323595506 65% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.481099656357 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 485.1 704.065955056 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 20.2370786517 54% => 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: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.971999232 60.3974514979 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.636363636 118.986275619 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4545454545 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.72727272727 5.21951772744 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.403070426351 0.243740707755 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195743536269 0.0831039109588 236% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.153490849076 0.0758088955206 202% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.281418878937 0.150359130593 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0953118448056 0.0667264976115 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 14.1392134831 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.8420337079 75% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 100.480337079 48% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.