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 states that converting the workweek to 4 10-hour days would be beneficial and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that the benefits are not enough to justify such a dramatic change to the workweek and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading claims that the 4-day workweek will reduce expenses for employees. The professor refutes this point by saying that the reduction is not enough to justify the change. He states that employees drive an average of about 30 miles a day to and from work. They usually spend around 15-20 dollars a day on gas, which amounts to only around 850 dollars in savings a year.
Second, the article posits that business owners will reduce their operating expenses by converting. However, the professor says that this idea is misguided. Though businesses that change would remain open for an extra two hours during the 4 days that they are open, those hours occur in the evening, which the professor explains are hours that most consumers don’t want to do business. According to the professor, saving a few hundred dollars doesn’t justify losing up to 20% of your business.
Third, the reading claims that converting will allow employees to spend more time with their family. The professor opposes this point by explaining that if employees with young children work 10-hour days, they will need to find day care for their young children, which is difficult. Also, if employees have older children, they won’t have the fifth day with their children because their children will be in school.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s each of the author's reasons. First, the reading claims that the 4-day...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...round 850 dollars in savings a year. Second, the article posits that business...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y losing up to 20% of your business. Third, the reading claims that convertin...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => 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: 1355.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15209125475 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48419078635 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532319391635 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 419.366225166 90% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.1808987235 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.230769231 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2307692308 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.30769230769 7.06452816374 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231999110276 0.272083759551 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0819556873932 0.0996497079465 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607316500701 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145556740122 0.162205337803 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0121609407547 0.0443174109184 27% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.