0910G[North America Flying] Argument241 by haunteagle

haunteagleUID: 2609432

TOPIC: ARGUMENT241 - The following appeared in a memo at the XYZ company.

"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating resumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less-expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
WORDS: 410
TIME: 00:29:45
DATE: 2009/7/20 12:09:42

The president claims that we should continue the cooperation with Delany Personnel Firm(DPF) to train our laid-off employees, not Waal Personnel Firm(WPF). Yet I find the evidence he gives is not convincing enough to get such a conclusion.

The president cites two cases concerning hiring DPF and WPF to train its laid -off employees to illustrate that the DPF is superior. Yet the president fail to prove that the people laid-off today is similar to the ones laid-off eight years ago and that the economic situation is similar. People's talent plays a vital role in hunting jobs and so it is with the social situation. Perhaps XYZ only fired people with little skills such as typists, cleaners, or doorkeepers eight years ago and it fired engineers recently. Or perhaps eight years ago the economy is experiencing a recession which makes hunting a job extremely difficult and presently the economy is in the rise which requires many workers. To prove that the DPF is superior to the WPF, the president should provide substantial evidence that basic status and economic situation are similar.

The president also fails to prove that a bigger firm can ensure a high efficiency in his comparison between the size of DPF and the WPF. The size can only prove that DPF is more profitable and exert different managing measures or different firm spirit. It does not necessarily means that DPF do better in job training than WPF. It is entirely possible that WPF serves the common workers without excellent talent or ability, yet WPF serves the people with unique talent or skill. Elites are always fewer than the mediocre. Thus the WPF needs fewer branches and smaller staff. To prove that WPF is better, the president should prove that WPF and DPF take similar management and their targets are similar as well.

The argument is weakened by the president's comparison between average time of finding a job. Job hunting consists of many aspects such as personal satisfaction, salary, location and future development. To fully evaluate whether and job training firm works well or not all these aspects should be taken into consideration. Maybe Walsh's clients earn much more than Delany's. Or maybe Walsh's clients have a higher level of satisfaction with their jobs. To substantiate his claim, the president should show how import the time usage is in the job hunting or provide other material that the Delany does well in all the other aspects.