[Big Fish]3月7日Argument241 by-bobbiezz

BobbieZZUID: 2756583

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."
==============================================================================================================

The argument asserts that Delany is better than Walsh, in helping employees’ assistance in creating resumes and developing interviewing skills who had be laid off by XYZ company. The author gives such suggestion that the contribution of Delany's services that made people found jobs more quickly. And the bigger staff and larger number of branch offices in Delany. In addition, the author also points the disadvantage on Walsh's failure that half of workers who laid off could not found job in eight years ago. The speaker's evidence seems that could stand his vies, however, it has several flaws in logical.

Firstly, half of the employees had not found jobs within a year in eight years ago who helped by the company of Walsh. The author unfairly assumes that the company could also finish this year's work in developing laid-off employees skill and help them found jobs. Walsh may have no sufficient power to finish the assistance before, however, during this year, they have developed and stronger than before. The offices and the staff of them have enlarged and they could achieve more complex work than us offered. In addition, for making our company believe them again, the prices offered by them is lower than others. So if the author could not give more details on Walsh situation of nowadays, he can not assert that the company is worse than Delany.

Secondly, although the Walsh is as worse as before, it could not assume that the Delany is the best choice for our company just based on they have bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. Perhaps the company is so complex that they not only do the employees job-helper work but also do other business. The most offices and worker are offered for their other business, it could not be used for our laid off employees for training. So the author should provide more evidence about the business work extent of Delany.

Thirdly, only based on the last year contribution of job-helper work is not enough to make consider that the Delany is better than other company. Although the major number of employees had found jobs quickly, the quality of their employments had not be mention in the argument. Perhaps the payment is lower than Walsh's offered. Perhaps the employments were not fit for laid off employees and they were fired sooner or later after they got the new tasks. Although the Walsh found job slower than Delany did, they had paid more time to develop our employees' skills and in order to make them got higher payment and more suitable employment. So only based on the speed of finding job is not enough to support Delany is better than Walsh.

In sum up, in order to make the argument more convinced, the speaker has to put more details about the situation about both the two companies both the later and present contribution and their environment only for help employees find job and training. Without more evidences, the author should do more widely consideration to choice the best company for XYZ company.