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.
The reading talks about the possibility of the Unite states workers to work 4 days per week and receive the 80% of the salary, which is a benefit for both, workers and companies. Otherwise, the lecturer has a counter opinion and refute each reason, casting serious doubts in the author's beliefs.
Firstly, the reading points out that working fewer hours, the employers will reduce their tiredness and, owing to this, the mistakes committed will fall considerably to provoke an enhance in the company's profits. However, the professor disproves this argument stating that the company, in fact, will have to spend more money with an increment of worker, due to the extra cost in training and health insurance. Furthermore, that increment the necessity of computers and office spaces. So, the facts are not how the author suggests.
Secondly, The reading argues that this plan reduces the unemployment around the country and improve the economical benefits of the company, because it receives the same work without pay overtime and with a reduction in the number of errors. The orator contradicts this position, saying that probably the employers will want to see the same productivity in both modalities of work, making as a result, less comfortable the work hours for 4-day workers; which this argument falls apart.
Finally, the writer remarks that this option leaves more free time, which improve worker's lifestyle because they could spend it with their family or in other leisure activities. Notwithstanding, the lecturer points out the weakness of this point by noting that they will have more risks of losing their jobs in case of a reduction of staff, since employers want people willing to work the entire week. Moreover, they have less possibility to gain a promotion, because the companies want full-time workers in their manager positions; remarking the unconvincing of this point.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 44, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... reading talks about the possibility of the Unite states workers to work 4 days per week ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 178, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...itted will fall considerably to provoke an enhance in the companys profits. However, the p...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 105, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...ment around the country and improve the economical benefits of the company, because it rec...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, in fact, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 10.4613686534 19% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1599.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 306.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22549019608 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63119794283 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581699346405 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 476.1 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 62.7351773676 49.2860985944 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.363636364 110.228320801 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8181818182 21.698381199 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.36363636364 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.203265508531 0.272083759551 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0720298068458 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599520524745 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124899796765 0.162205337803 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0311126473813 0.0443174109184 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.3589403974 128% => 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: 13.35 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.