Argument132 0906G ANap Hand 作文互改小组】第七次作业 by brokenwingssss

brokenwingssssUID: 2484462

132The 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."



The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. BY making a comparison of workers in the store, these
workers with fewer work hours and therefore fewer days of sick leave, with the workers in the factory, those workers with
heavier workload and a slightly increasing number of days of sick leave, the argument for reducing the worker's wordload in
order to make them have better health and improved morale seems logical. However, the editorial does not convince me by those
datas and reasons.

To begin with, the mere fact that employees in the store took fewer days of sick leave last year does not necessarily mean
that the their health conditions have been improved. Because the overall work time decreased last year, it might be the case
that many employees got sick when they were out of work. For that reason, the number of days of sick leave reported is much
smaller than the actual number of days when employee got illness. Thus, the overall health conditions of the employees may
remain the same as before, or even get worse during last year.

Moreover, the arguer unfairly establishes the casual relationship between the increase of the number of days of sick leave
and the full-time policy. Yet there are a myriad of variables that can contribute to the increase. Perhaps the working
condition greatly deteriorated last year. It might be also likely that the workers frequently used sick leave as an excuse
when they are not really ill. Before such alternative explanations are ruled out, the arguer can not make me convinced.

Finally, the survey cited is too vague to be informative. We are told nothing about how the survey was conducted and whether
the result is representative of all the workers. Furthermore, the information provided in the survey is not enough for the
purposing of drawing any conclusion. Why are employees in the store satisfied with their jobs? Maybe it is the high salary
and low pressure lead to their satisfaction, which has nothing to do with their work hours. On the other hand, the reason why
factory employees are discontent about their job may lie in their poor working condition or lower social status that are not
related to working interval either.

To sum up, the argument is not well reasoned as it stands. In order to better access the argument, the arguer has to provide
more evidences about the health conditions of the store and factory workers. In addition, the arguer should also demonstrate
that the length of working period is the only thing workers concern .