arguement12T 求批改【另征长期互判小伙伴~】

cindy20120133UID：3610424

12, （生产，劳动安全/对策/先并列后递进）The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.
"During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents(2,4) than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours(5). Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta(6) and thereby increase productivity(1), we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep(3)." ★★181
1.        The president provides no evidence that overall worker productivity is attributable in part to the number of on-the-job accidents. (NCR) ★★★
2.        The president assumes that some accidents at Alta are caused by fatigue or sleep deprivation. (U.A) ★★★★
3.        The assumption that Alta's workers would use the additional hour of free time to sleep or rest is open to doubt. (U.A) ★★★
4.        The president fails to consider that the per-worker accident rate might reveal that Alta is actually safer than Panoply, depending on the total number of workers at each company. (V.D) ★★★
5.        The president fails to consider possible differences between Alta and Panoply which render them incomparable. (F.A) ★★★★
6.        Merely shortening the work shifts might not suffice to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents. (sufficiency of the solution) ★★★

The arguer states that the shorter work shifts is the reason of lower percentage of on-the-job accidents at Panoply. Lacking amounts of rest really influence a lot because the workers cannot focus on their work which may results in an accident. However, there are still other explanations for it.

The shorter work shifts also means they work for longer time everyday and which will contribute to a larger numbers of accidents. The president also fails to consider that the per-worker accident rate might reveal that the Alta is actually safer than Panoply, depending on the total number of workers at each company. For example, if workers in Panoply work 8 hours every day and they have 5 accidents every week, meanwhile workers in the Alta work 10 hours every day and they only have 6 accidents every week. We can easily conclude that although the total numbers is lower in Panoply, it has higher possibilities of having accidents during their work. Thus we cannot tell the actual safety extent unless we know the exact work time in two factories.

Apart from the working time, what they do at work is also important when considered the risky of their work. We already know two factories produce very similar products, but there are still no evidence shows that whether their producing process is the same. Maybe the Panoply has some advance technologies to avoid the dangerous part in the production work line. Presumed that the producing process in Panoply is much safer than the Alta, the percentage of on-the-job accidents will still be lower.

The arguer only give out information about the work shifts time, we don't know other evidences like the working environment and whether the workers have the same educated level or the same safety knowledge. How safe and reliable the working equipments are can charge for the different extents of work safety. In another hand, if workers in Panoply are more proficient with the equipment or have higher education level to know how to avoid accidents during their work, it will lead to the same result of different percentage of on-the-job accidents.

From above claims, we can see that there are still be many possible explanations for the lower percentage of accidents of Panoply. To prove the inadequate amounts of rest needs accounts for the accidents, arguer should give us more evidence to show other explanation is impossible.

本人tofel103(写作26)，5.23考gre，求互判~有意加邮箱cindy20120133@163.com