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 benefits.
For the country as a whole, one of the primary benefits of offering this option to employees is that it would reduce unemployment rate. 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.
The reading article and lecture talk about work hours in a day and week in the United States. The passage points out the interest among some employees to work for only 4days. On the contrary, the speaker disagrees with the idea. The following mentions some of the points.
Firstly, the passage depicts that employing for four days will assist the company in improving the economy as the workers will be more relaxed and free from all stress. The proper rest will lead to more focus on jobs. On the other hand, the speaker argues that the expenditure of an organisation will increase in the form of training, medical facility and space for workers.
Secondly, paragraph portrays that the office staff will be more active and enthusiastic about their duty. Moreover, the idea leads to reduce unemployment as for rest of the days, more hiring will be possible. However, the speaker disagrees with the statement as claims that the hiring becomes expensive, stress among employees increases as to complete five-day work in four days. Also, it leads to overtime of the staff.
Lastly, the reading article avers that the staff members of an organisation will be able to spend more time with their families, thereby improving their living standards and leisure activities. But the speaker refutes the idea and posits that the working for only four days reduces the job stability and limits the career options. Furthermore, the promotions will only be to the employees opting for five days in a week.
In conclusion, both the passage and the speaker presents their idea of working for four hours a week. The article covers the benefits of employees and thereby improving their life standards. Opposite, the speaker reveals that idea leads to unemployment as the same and will be expensive.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 254, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...s with the idea. The following mentions some of the points. Firstly, the passage depicts...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 232, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ards. Opposite, the speaker reveals that idea leads to unemployment as the same a...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, as for, as to, in conclusion, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1502.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 299.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02341137124 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48388053894 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481605351171 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 451.8 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.3216460039 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.3529411765 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5882352941 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.82352941176 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
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: 0.300051109199 0.272083759551 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101348310391 0.0996497079465 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0959400246824 0.0662205650399 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.186164245295 0.162205337803 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0459151120792 0.0443174109184 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.54 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.