argument179--欢迎拍文

fchenyanUID: 2804020

TOPIC: ARGUMENT179 - The following is a memorandum written by the director of personnel to the president of the Cedar Corporation.

"It would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year. It is the second most expensive caterer in the city. In addition, its prices have risen in each of the last three years, and it refuses to provide meals for people on special diets. Just last month three employees complained to me that they no longer eat in the cafeteria because they find the experience 'unbearable.' Our company should instead hire Discount Foods. Discount is a family-owned local company and it offers a varied menu of fish and poultry. I recently tasted a sample lunch at one of the many companies that Discount serves and it was delicious-an indication that hiring Discount will lead to improved employee satisfaction."
WORDS: 501
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-07-21 21:06:25

The memorandum suggests that it would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company to supply the food in Cedar Corporation's employee cafeteria next year and recommend Discount Foods to hire. To support the recommendation, the author outlines a lot of shortages of the Good-Taste Company and also some advantages of the later company. However, the memorandum suffers from several flaws making it dubious and unconvincing.
Firstly, the author's saying that the Good-Taste Company is the second most expensive caterer in the city is groundless. It lacks detailed comparison with other companies. Even if it is expensive, that can be accepted if the things they offer value for the price. So both whether it is expensive and which it is in the rank are not enough to support the suggestion that not to rehire it.
Secondly, the author thinks it is the Good-Taste Company to blame for the risen of its price in each of the last three years. However, without consideration about the current economic situation and other factors may influence the price of the company, we cannot make it clear about whether the increase in price if reasonable. Even if it has unreasonable price increases behavior, further in-depth study is need to show the basic reason so that we can prevent form suffering the same situations.
Thirdly, about the saying about that the Good-Taste Company refuses to provide meals for people on special diets. It is dubious whether the special diets are rationale and whether the company has the obligation to meet such kinds of requirements.
Fourthly, the author cited the instances of employees complained to the president saying that they no longer eat in the cafeteria because they find the experience 'unbearable'. However, in-depth investigation is needed to find the real reason of their denying to eating there. Details of their experience are necessary whether the company is to blame. What's more, even there are conflicts between employees of both the two company, they are not suffice to refuse to rehire the Good-Taste Company.
On the other side, further information is need to substantiate that the Discount Foods is the proper company to hire even if we assume that it would a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company. That's because whether the family-owned local company has the ability to suffice the demands of the employees is still left not proved. Even if it offers a varied menu of fish and poultry, but whether the employees will like or not is unsure. What's more, only the sample lunch at one of the many companies that Discount serves is far less to guarantee the recommendation, since the company is not to offer just lunch and the author has not enough information about things they serve.
In summary, there are quite a lot doubtful points in the reason of the memorandum. To support the recommendation, more in-depth research is needed to provide enough reason to refuse to rehire the Good-Taste Company and so is more detailed information about the Discount Foods.