Both the reading passage and the lecturer discusses the four-day working culture for employees in a week. The reading passage claims that the option of working a four-day workweek for four-fifths (80 percent)of the normal pay of an employee would benefit the economy as a whole as well as the individual companies and the employees who decided to take the option. The lecturer, however, finds the claims presented in the passage implausible and presents some arguments to refute them all.
Firstly, the passage suggests that by hiring more staff to ensure that the same amount of work would be accomplished would not result in additional payroll costs because four-day employees would only be paid 80 percent of the normal rate. Thereby, companies would have fewer overworked and error-prone employees for the same money, which would increase company profits. Conversely, the lecturer states that hiring employees would force the company to spend more as adding new workforce will include many responsibilities i.e. providing training, medical benefits, more office space and more computers requirements for new employees. Therefore, this will add to the company's extra expenses and wouldn't be profitable.
Secondly, the reading contends the primary benefits of offering four-day work option to employees is that it would reduce unemployment rates. If many full-time employees started working fewer hours, some of their workloads would have to be shifted to others. In contrast, the lecturer underlies the fact that overall employment would be affected as unemployment rates would increase. The companies will raise an expectation bar by expecting employees to work overtime as some work commitments would be completed within four days than previously which were done in five days time, leading to no additional job creation.
Finally, the reading asserts that with this four-day workweek employees personal life could improve by spending the extra time with their families, pursuing private interests, or enjoying leisure activities. On the contrary, the speaker dismisses this more free time in personal life claim as according to him an employee working four-day a week will risk his quality of life and would always be questioned for job stability issues leading to less advancement in his/her career. He/She will be first to lose job whenever economic downturn comes for a company. He/she will not be considered for management positions since a 5-day work employee would have better coverage and consistent supervision according to the company.
Therefore, the lecturer doubts the claims in the reading as according to him four-day workweek will not add to the company's profit, nor improve its economic condition as well as benefit an employees personal life.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 463, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[1]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...s would force the company to spend more as adding new workforce will include many ...
^^
Line 3, column 694, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
... add to the companys extra expenses and wouldnt be profitable. Secondly, the reading...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 187, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an employee' or simply 'employees'?
Suggestion: an employee; employees
...s economic condition as well as benefit an employees personal life.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in addition, in contrast, as well as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 5.04856512141 436% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2343.0 1373.03311258 171% => OK
No of words: 432.0 270.72406181 160% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42361111111 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.04702891845 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74302234704 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 145.348785872 150% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50462962963 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 703.8 419.366225166 168% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.8632877192 49.2860985944 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.4375 110.228320801 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 21.698381199 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.875 7.06452816374 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.734565467189 0.272083759551 270% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.273207772134 0.0996497079465 274% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.14768376168 0.0662205650399 223% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.419355837414 0.162205337803 259% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.137999421362 0.0443174109184 311% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 13.3589403974 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 53.8541721854 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 63.6247240618 189% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.