GMAT考试写作参考例文
Employees should not have full access to their own personnel files. If, for example, employees were allowed to see certain confidential materials, the people supplying that information would not be likely to express their opinions candidly.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
The issue is whether employees should have full access to their own personnel files. The speaker claims that they should not, pointing out that such access could diminish the condor of those supplying information. To some extent, I agree with this viewpoint. Although employees are entitled to be accurately informed about the substance of performance reviews or complaints in their files, at times there will be good reason not to identify information sources.
First of all, employers have a right to control some information pertinent to their business success. Unproductive or uncooperative workers can seriously harm an organization; for this reason, employers need to have accurate information about employee performance. But when employees have full access to their own personnel files, co-workers and even supervisors will often find it difficult to give frank criticism of underachievers or to report troublemakers. So although employees have legitimate claims to know what has been said about them, they are not always entitled to know who said it.
Secondly, employers are obligated to control some information when their employees are accursed of unlawful conduct. Since employers are responsible for wrongdoing at the workplace, they must investigate charges of, for example, drug activity, possession of firearms, or harassment. But again, without assurances of anonymity, accusers may be less forthright. Furthermore, they may be in jeopardy of retaliation by the accused. So while workers under investigation may be generally informed about complaints or reports, they should not know who filed them. Even so, employers do not enjoy an unlimited right to gather and keep confidential information about employees. For example, it would be unjust to investigate an employees political viewpoints, religious preference, or sexual orientation. Such invasions of privacy are not warranted by an employers right to performance-related information, or duty to protect the workplace from criminal wrongdoing.
In conclusion, limiting employee access to personnel files is sometimes warranted to encourage candor and prevent retaliation against information sources. At the same time, employers have no right to solicit or secure information about the private lives of their workers.
上一篇: GMAT考试写作参考例文(19)
下一篇: GMAT考试写作参考例文(4)
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 4《Wild life》word单词学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 1《Cultural relics》(Reading2)学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 4《Wild life protection》word导学案按课时打包下载(4份,含解析)
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 2《The Olympic》word知识点学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 3《Computers》word导学案(18页)
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 5《Music》word导学案按课时打包下载(4份,含解析)
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 2《The Olympic Games》word导学案按课时打包下载(4份,含解析)
2016人教版高中英语必修一Unit 1《Friendship》word导学案2
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 2《The Olympic》word单词学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 3《Computers》(Reading)学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 4《Wild life》word语法学案
2013人教版必修一Unit4《Earthquakes》(the 4th period)word教案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 5《Music》(Using languae)知识点整理
人教版高中英语必修二全册教案word版93页
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 2《The
2013人教版必修一Unit4《Earthquakes》(the 2nd period)word教案
2013人教版必修一Unit5《Nelson Mandela-a modern hero》the 2nd period教案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 5《Music》(language points)学案
2013人教版必修一Unit4《Earthquakes》(the 7th period)word教案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 3《Computers》(Grammar)学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 5《Music》word导学案(24页)
2013人教版必修一Unit4《Earthquakes》(the 6th period)word教案
2013人教版必修一Unit3《Travel journal》(the 4th period)word教案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 2《The Olympic》word复习学案
2013人教版必修一Unit5《Nelson Mandela-a modern hero》the 1st period教案
2013人教版必修一Unit4《Earthquakes》(the 1st period)word教案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 3《Computers》word学案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 4《Wild life》word第二篇课文知识点
2013人教版必修一Unit4《Earthquakes》(the 3rd period)word教案
人教版高中英语必修二Unit 4《Wild life》word检测学案