Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours Use spec

Essay topics:

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours. Use spec

The question of whether working three days per week for longer hours is more enjoyable than five days per week for shorter hours has aroused many controversial debates among employees and scholars. While some believe working three days a week is more enjoyable due to the more days off, others contemplate that regular working, five days for fewer hours, is more beneficial. As far as I am concerned, I am of the opinion that regular time of working, five days a week is more satisfying and enjoyable for employees. In the following paragraph, I will delve into the crucial reasons and examples justifying my point of view.
The first reason coming to my mind is that three days of work means excessive workload which can impose enormous stress on employees. Over time, stressful conditions can affect employees' health. In the method of working, the employees should deal with a heavy workload in a short period of time to meet the deadline of backbreaking tasks which leads to a lot of pressure on them. Stress is the primary cause of many chronic diseases. For instance, one of my friends who works intensively at the workplace has diabetes and cardiovascular diseases in spite of his healthy lifestyle. The doctor said it is because of work stress.
Another noteworthy reason is that the policy of working three days instead of five days like regular conditions at work might jeopardize job security. As employees have been expected to their assigned tasks in longer hours their productivity in the work environment can significantly reduce which leads to a costly mistake. As a result, it would have a detrimental impact on their job, since employees are usually less tolerant of the mistakes of their workers. My experience is a compelling example of this. Since I was tired of working long hours at night shift, I made a really bad mistake at work. The corporation made me redundant when they need cut some employees.
From what has been discussed above, we can conclude that working shorter hours a day not only lead to a less stressful situation that benefits employee's health but also guarantees their job security by increasing their meticulousness at work.

Votes
Average: 7.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: Whether; The question whether
The question of whether working three days per week for longer ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 280, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...d deal with a heavy workload in a short period of time to meet the deadline of backbreaking ta...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 151, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... at work might jeopardize job security. As employees have been expected to their a...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, really, so, while, for instance, as a result, in spite of

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 13.8261648746 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1807.0 1977.66487455 91% => OK
No of words: 366.0 407.700716846 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93715846995 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75620230375 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 212.727598566 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.535519125683 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 618.680645161 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => 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: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0571861499 48.9658058833 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.294117647 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5294117647 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.64705882353 5.45110844103 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.35108843346 0.236089414692 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100397736267 0.076458572812 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101070158163 0.0737576698707 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204646654954 0.150856017488 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103143607866 0.0645574589148 160% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 58.1214874552 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 86.8835125448 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.002688172 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.

So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:

reasons == advantages or

reasons == disadvantages

for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.

or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.


Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.