4-Day Workweek
The popular 5-day workweek has long been a staple in U.S. business. With employees working 8 hours a day for a total of 40 hours a week, it has been seen as a model of efficiency. However, some companies and government agencies have begun converting to a 10-hour-a-day, 4-day workweek. This conversion offers numerous benefits to both businesses and employees and should be seriously considered.
First, a 4-day workweek will alleviate some considerable expenses for the average employee. A recent national survey found that 34% of prospective employees turned down job offers because of long commutes to work. With the high cost of gas and vehicle maintenance, eliminating one day’s driving per week will reduce expenses by quite a bit, making the idea of working far from home more appealing and giving employees the opportunity to use the money saved to cover other, more pressing costs.
Second, reducing the number of working days will lower the operating costs of most businesses; employers won’t need to keep their business open an extra day. This will result in less money spent on fixed expenses, such as lighting and air conditioning, helping to improve a company’s profitability. By eliminating one business day, companies will not only save significantly on operating expenses but also have the additional benefit of a more efficient workforce continually energized with a 3-day weekend.
Third, a 4-day workweek will improve the ability of employees to spend time with their families. Work is often cited as the major reason why parents don’t spend time with their children and one reason why some stop working. With a reduced workweek, they will spend an extra day with their children and other loved ones, helping to improve their overall quality of life and thus sending them back to work happier.
The article talks about the conversion into ten hours a day for four days per week rather than eight hours for five days. It states that this conversion has many benefits to both businesses and employees. That is why it has to be seriously considered. In response, the professor opposes that new work regimen.
To begin with, the reading says that working oneday less decreases many expenses, such as the gas cost. Consequently, the employee will be able to save money for other necessary payments. However, the professor refutes that by illustrating that the saved many is not high to be considered as enough to change the work schedule. He says that the saving will be around 20 dollars per mounth which is very low regarding the big change.
Second, the article claims that reducing the number of working days will lower the operating cost for most businesses. In contrast, the professor says that it is not true. He believes that this reducing will cost companies more. The particular reason for that is the loosing of 20% of the costumers from the reduced day. In addition to that he says that this shift will cost more because the company will be paying more for the additional night working hours.
Finally, the reading states that the four dys working regimen is going to improve the qality of life for the employee. The professor opposes that by saying that this additional day will not have any benefit for people who have kids at the school age since they will be at school during this time. In the other hand, it will cost them more if they have younger kids because they are going to pay more fore additional hours at the daycare.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 53, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun decreases is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...h, the reading says that working oneday less decreases many expenses, such as the ga...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, finally, however, if, regarding, second, so, as to, in addition, in contrast, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1361.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.69310344828 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33946902926 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520689655172 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 408.6 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4588273776 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.0625 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.125 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.125 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.170273650561 0.272083759551 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572791007013 0.0996497079465 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0604415022471 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116474568672 0.162205337803 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.057961126383 0.0443174109184 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.7 13.3589403974 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 53.8541721854 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 11.0289183223 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.63 12.2367328918 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.14 8.42419426049 85% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 63.6247240618 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.