Seniority (years of service) should not be the basis of employee compensation. Employees should be promoted and given raises solely on the basis of their work performance and merit. That is a better way to encourage high productivity.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.
The issue states that employee compensation should be decided solely on the basis of work performance and merit and not on the basis of seniority. I find this statement extreme and would not stand by it completely; whereas I am also not in the favor of promotions solely on the basis of seniority. I think there should be a middle ground between where both these factors should be accounted to decide compensation and not just one of the two.
To begin with, let us explore the case in which seniority is the only basis of promotion and raises. If such would be the case, no doubt the incentive amongst the employees to work hard and be the best face of themselves would be snatched away from them. A feeling that however poor they perform they would be compensated the same would get instilled which would hold them back from performing their best. Government firms in India are the classic example of it wherein seniority is the only criteria for promotion. Employees there are known for their dilidary attitude, languishing their work due to which these company as a whole do not progress dynamically in comparision to their private sector counterparts even though they are have poorer funding initially but their employment compensation is on the basis of performance and merit. Therefore, seniority as the only criteria to decide compensation can be dangerous.
On the other side, if we goive promotions and raises solely on the basis of work performance and merit, it does not turn out to be just for the employeees. We must consider the biological factor that with age, the productivity of humans start sapping. Their mental and physical faculties wane with time. That doesnot mean they should not be raised in the period of the time when they need the company the most. This would create frustration and dissent in the senior citizen section of the society and is not morally upright. In order to secure their old age, there should be some factor that accounts for their seniority in the company and pays them well in return of the years of loyal service they have offered tio the company even if their current performance level is not in par with theie younger colleagues.
In sum, analysing both these cases with deep scrutiny, I would suggest that compensations for the employees should be established taking both the factor, seniority as well as performance, in account. There must be a positive correlation of compensation with both these factors. The extent of correlation may vary from firm to firm.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 383, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nstilled which would hold them back from performing their best. Government firms ...
^^
Line 3, column 609, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this company' or 'these companies'?
Suggestion: this company; these companies
...de, languishing their work due to which these company as a whole do not progress dynamically ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 735, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...ector counterparts even though they are have poorer funding initially but their empl...
^^^^
Line 8, column 165, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...ished taking both the factor, seniority as well as performance, in account. There must be ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'well', 'whereas', 'i think', 'no doubt', 'as well as', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.225596529284 0.240241500013 94% => OK
Verbs: 0.145336225597 0.157235817809 92% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0737527114967 0.0880659088768 84% => OK
Adverbs: 0.060737527115 0.0497285424764 122% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0629067245119 0.0444667217837 141% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.136659436009 0.12292977631 111% => OK
Participles: 0.0303687635575 0.0406280797675 75% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.67253320802 2.79330140395 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0195227765727 0.030933414821 63% => OK
Particles: 0.00216919739696 0.0016655270985 130% => OK
Determiners: 0.106290672451 0.0997080785238 107% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0390455531453 0.0249443105267 157% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0151843817787 0.0148568991511 102% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2526.0 2732.02544248 92% => OK
No of words: 430.0 452.878318584 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.87441860465 6.0361032391 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55372829156 4.58838876751 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.306976744186 0.366273622748 84% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.232558139535 0.280924506359 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.158139534884 0.200843997647 79% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.125581395349 0.132149295362 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67253320802 2.79330140395 96% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 219.290929204 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493023255814 0.48968727796 101% => OK
Word variations: 54.9692984326 55.4138127331 99% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6194690265 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.8888888889 23.380412469 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.8717520061 59.4972553346 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.333333333 141.124799967 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8888888889 23.380412469 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.777777777778 0.674092028746 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.94800884956 81% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.21349557522 77% => OK
Readability: 47.1447028424 51.4728631049 92% => OK
Elegance: 1.45967741935 1.64882698954 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.631216953602 0.391690518653 161% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.136021081248 0.123202303941 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0799843363858 0.077325440228 103% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.55849509179 0.547984918172 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.138176517919 0.149214159877 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.269138048912 0.161403998019 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.132822667406 0.0892212321368 149% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.451928615138 0.385218514788 117% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0961978882255 0.0692045440612 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.465527472441 0.275328986314 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.128413699975 0.0653680567796 196% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.4325221239 77% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.30420353982 57% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88274336283 143% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 7.22455752212 83% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.66592920354 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.70907079646 148% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 13.5995575221 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.