argument132 3.9 求拍！

雪然UID: 2773876

TOPIC: ARGUMENT132 - The following appeared in an editorial in the local newspaper of Workville.

"Workers should be allowed to reduce their workload from 40 to 25 or even 20 hours per week because it is clear that people who work part-time instead of full-time have better health and improved morale. One store in Workville, which began allowing its employees to work part-time last year, reports that fewer days of sick leave were taken last year than in previous years. In contrast, the factory in Workville, which does not allow any of its employees to work part-time, had a slight increase in the number of days of sick leave taken last year. In addition, a recent survey reports that most of the store employees stated that they are satisfied with their jobs, while many of the factory employees stated that they are dissatisfied with their jobs."
WORDS:394
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-3-9 14:37:56

In this argument, the author recommends that the workers should be allowed to reduce their workload. To justify this recommendation, the author notes that people who work part-time have better health and improved morale, and that the part-time worker are less likely have sick leave, while a survey shows that employees work full-time in factory are dissatisfied with their jobs. For several reasons, the evidence provides flimsy support to the recommendation.

First of all, the author insufficiently asserts that the people who work part-time have better health than who work full-time. There is not evidence shows that people suffer worse health because of the longer hours they work. On the contrary, those people work part-time might obtain better physical condition due to the balance diet or other reasons. We can not draw a conclusion merely from the evidence the author supplies while the author is incapable to establish a causal relationship between part-time job and good health.

In the second place, it is imprudent to compare part- time job with full-time job on sick leave since the fundamental differences between each other. Part-time job requires less hours on work and employees may went to see the doctor in rest of the day if they are sick while people work full-time job have to take a sick leave to go to see the doctor. Aside for this, there is no evidence shows that full-time job can causes health problems which leads to sick leave as it is already discussed firstly.

Finally, the author mistakenly argues that the survey shows that workers in factory are unsatisfied with they job rest on the assumption that working in store is analogous to working in factory, since they are totally different jobs. The author also fails to provide detail of what actually the workers do in the factory. Consider, for instance, it is boring and tiring for employees working in factory, they probably would not have any good impression of it. So the author’s conclusion is not based on solid ground.

In summary, the recommendation is not well supported by the author. To bolster it, the author should offer more information about advantages of part-time job and adequate evidence showing that the part-time job will benefit worker’s health. To better assess the strength of the recommendation I would need more information about the economic and market situations of Workville.

dingyi0311UID: 2627919

In the first place, the arguer claims that people who have a part-time job will maintain a healthier status than those who have a full-time job. However, no evidence in the argument support this assertion. it is possible that the real situation is completely polar opposite to what the speaker revealed； perhaps the workers who have a full-time job earn much more money than those part-time worker so that they can eat healthy food,  that the extra money can provide them better medical care,  and the regular working make them live a more regular live, which also make them more healthy. Without ruling out the possibility presented above, the arguer obviously can not claim so.

dingyi0311UID: 2627919

我觉得第一段这样写好点吧