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 passages talks about the beneficial outcomes of having employees work four-day a week but the professer in the lectures refutes that for the following reasons.
First, the passage claims that having four-day working employees would save the companies more money and benefits it's economy, but the professor disagrees with that by mentioning that this idea will force the individual companies to spend more money as they will hire more employees, taking up more office space and computers which will eventually decreasing the company's profit.
Second, the passage states that having shortened workweek would make the employees more comfortable reduce the employees errors and hiring more staff to get the work done wouldn't result in any additional costs, but the professor in the lecture argued that by suggesting to ask the employees for overtime or increase the expectations cause hiring more employees will definetly cost the company more.
Third, the passage suggests that these four-day employee would benefit from the extra free time they get in a week to enjoy their lives, but the professor disagrees with that cause he sees that decision might decrease the quality of lives of these employees by decreasing their job stability and advancement or lose their jobs and they would lose promotion opportunities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 14, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'talk'.
Suggestion: talk
The passages talks about the beneficial outcomes of having...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 83, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tcomes of having employees work four-day a week but the professer in the lectures...
^^
Line 3, column 47, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the passage claims that having four-day working employees would save the compani...
^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
... hiring more staff to get the work done wouldnt result in any additional costs, but the...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 260, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggesting asking'.
Suggestion: suggesting asking
...professor in the lecture argued that by suggesting to ask the employees for overtime or increase ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 0.0 10.4613686534 0% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1121.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 209.0 270.72406181 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.36363636364 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80221413058 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5595268816 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 145.348785872 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55980861244 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 334.8 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 4.0 13.0662251656 31% => 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: 52.0 21.2450331126 245% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 95.3267407394 49.2860985944 193% => OK
Chars per sentence: 280.25 110.228320801 254% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 52.25 21.698381199 241% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 7.25 7.06452816374 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.24583265511 0.272083759551 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167839639472 0.0996497079465 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0472262271201 0.0662205650399 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167839639472 0.162205337803 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0472262271201 0.0443174109184 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 29.9 13.3589403974 224% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: 18.7 53.8541721854 35% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 23.6 11.0289183223 214% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 14.7 12.2367328918 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.07 8.42419426049 120% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 63.6247240618 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 10.7273730684 172% => OK
gunning_fog: 22.8 10.498013245 217% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 30.0 11.2008830022 268% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.