In the United States, employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day. However, many employees want to work a four-day week and are willing to accept less pay in order to do so. A mandatory policy requiring companies to offer their employees the option of working a four-day workweek for four-fifths (80 percent) of their normal pay would benefit the economy as a whole as well as the individual companies and the employees who decided to take the option. The shortened workweek would increase company profits because employees would feel more rested and alert, and as a result, they would make fewer costly errors in their work. 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. In the end, companies would have fewer overworked and error-prone employees for the same money, which would increase company profits. For the country as a whole, one of the primary benefits of offering this option to employees is that it would reduce unemployment rates. If many full-time employees started working fewer hours, some of their workload would have to be shifted to others. Thus, for every four employees who went on an 80 percent week, a new employee could be hired at the 80 percent rate. Finally, the option of a four-day workweek would be better for individual employees. Employees who could afford a lower salary in exchange for more free time could improve the quality of their lives by spending the extra time with their families, pursuing private interests, or enjoying leisure activities.
Both the reading and the lecture introduce an idea that reducing the work hour for the employee either increase the companies benefits or not. According to the passage, cutting workload with salary of employee ultimately enhance the profit, lessen the unemployment problems and improves the quality of lives of workers. But, the speaker utterly rejects all the assumptions made by the passage.
The reading suggests that companies can make more profit if the set the new policy of lowering employee's salary as decreasing work hour weekly basis. On the contrary, professor believes it actually enhance the costs on the ground new employees have required to fulfill the requirements.
The writer mentions the reduction of unemployment problems, the speaker suggests a contradictory idea by saying this, the situation might raises the company's deserving, the employees have offered overtime or would have done same amount of work at reduced work hours. In this case, there are no extra job positions would increase.
Finally, in perusing, writer believes quality of lives improved much, however, the lecturer mentions another rationale to deny the idea, according to speaker, in spite of raising quality lives it would increase the job risk
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 96, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employees'' or 'employee's'?
Suggestion: employees'; employee's
...t if the set the new policy of lowering employees salary as decreasing work hour weekly b...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 199, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'enhances'?
Suggestion: enhances
...ontrary, professor believes it actually enhance the costs on the ground new employees h...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 215, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sing quality lives it would increase the job risk
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, however, if, so, in spite of, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 10.4613686534 10% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 12.0772626932 17% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 6.0 22.412803532 27% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1054.0 1373.03311258 77% => OK
No of words: 195.0 270.72406181 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40512820513 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73687570622 4.04702891845 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65960603727 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 120.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.615384615385 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 324.9 419.366225166 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.6567861868 49.2860985944 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.75 110.228320801 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.375 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.625 7.06452816374 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18436172939 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0796262669953 0.0996497079465 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748719992215 0.0662205650399 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110244432365 0.162205337803 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0728504434744 0.0443174109184 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 53.8541721854 72% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.93 8.42419426049 118% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.