Company X has just switched to a 4-day workweek, mandating that employees work 10 hours per day from
Monday to Thursday instead of 8 hours per day from Monday to Friday. Although the policy is new,
Company X claims that the policy will help to increase profits by shutting down offices on Fridays and to
boost employee morale by reducing commuting time to and from work each week.
The argument claims that reducing travel time will have a positive impact on profits of the firm. While it may be the case but it has many logical gaps that should be addressed before making any conclusion. The argument should take into account whether the policy will really reduce the commute time and if yes, by how much and is it really considerable. The argument completely misses the opinion of the employees and if they are willing to adopt 10-hour working plan. These questions cast serious doubts on the conclusion made, and unsurprisingly, the plan can even affect negatively and lead to reduced profits.
The largest leap in the argument is that the commute time will be reduced to the level that it will lead to increased employee morale. The case might be that most of the employees live nearby the office and the commute time is not really high. Further, the commute time might even increase because now the timing overlap among the employees will increase in a 10-hour working pattern. And so, more people will be commuting at the same time that can lead to increased congestion on roads. This can bring down the morale and consequently the profits of the company.
Even if we assume that the commute time will reduce it is prudent to ask if employees are really willing to work for longer every day. Today about 25% of IT professionals in San Francisco suffer from back, neck or shoulder related health issues. These are shown to be the consequences of long sitting hours and less physical movement. Extending the working hours will further aggravate the problem. Thus, people might not be willing at all to make a transition from 8-hour to 10-hour work shift. If they are forced to do so it will severely affect their well-being and as a consequence performance of the company as a whole will go down.
While the argument presents an interesting claim, it does makes certain crucial assumptions. The argument omits considering if the commute time will really reduce, the opinion of the employees as to whether they are okay working for longer hours. Finally, the argument can be strengthened by quantifying the amount of reduction in travel time, and conducting a survey wherein they can obtain employees' opinion on the new working strategy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 284, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...t whether the policy will really reduce the commute time and if yes, by how much and is it ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 42, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...he largest leap in the argument is that the commute time will be reduced to the level that ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 208, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...he employees live nearby the office and the commute time is not really high. Further, the c...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 254, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...mmute time is not really high. Further, the commute time might even increase because now th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 24, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... the company. Even if we assume that the commute time will reduce it is prudent to ask i...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 128, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ions. The argument omits considering if the commute time will really reduce, the opinion of...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 194, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...ly reduce, the opinion of the employees as to whether they are okay working for longer hours....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, if, may, really, so, then, thus, well, while, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 58.6224719101 72% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1882.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 386.0 442.535393258 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87564766839 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57764079342 2.79657885939 92% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 579.6 704.065955056 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.3537773688 60.3974514979 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 99.0526315789 118.986275619 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3157894737 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.15789473684 5.21951772744 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192119272034 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0678111798301 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0553760042793 0.0758088955206 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123515360348 0.150359130593 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0580853413625 0.0667264976115 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 100.480337079 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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.