下面是一篇关于wage 的GRE官方满分范文。这篇GRE官方范文的主要背景是大多数公司都同意认为相较于工作带来的物理上的伤害的增加,员工的工资也应该增加。因为这会使员工在经济上觉得工作的地方是安全的:他们减少自己的薪金总额的花销然后存钱。
The following appeared as part of an article in a daily newspaper:
Most companies would agree that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. Hence it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer: they could thus reduce their payroll expenses and save money.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
This argument states that it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer because by making the workplace safer then lower wages could be paid to employees. This conclusion is based on the premise that as the list of physical injury increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. However, there are several assumptions that may not necessarily apply to this argument. For example, the costs associated with making the workplace safe must outweigh the increased payroll expenses due to hazardous conditions. Also, one must look at the plausability of improving the work environment. And finally, because most companies agree that as the risk of injury increases so will wages doesnt necessarily mean that the all companies which have hazardous work environments agree.
The first issue to be addressed is whether increased labor costs justify large capital expenditures to improve the work environment. Clearly one could argue that if making the workplace safe would cost an exorbitant amount of money in comparison to leaving the workplace as is and paying slightly increased wages than it would not make sense to improve the work environment. For example, if making the workplace safe would cost $100 million versus additional payroll expenses of only $5,000 per year, it would make financial sense to simply pay the increased wages. No business or business owner with any sense would pay all that extra money just to save a couple dollars and improve employee health and relations. To consider this, a cost benefit analysis must be made. I also feel that although a cost benefit analysis should be the determining factor with regard to these decisions making financial sense, it may not be the determining factor with regard to making social, moral and ethical sense.
This argument also relies on the idea that companies solely use financial sense in analysing improving the work environment. This is not the case. Companies look at other considerations such as the negative social ramifications of high on-job injuries. For example, Toyota spends large amounts of money improving its environment because while its goal is to be profitable, it also prides itself on high employee morale and an almost perfectly safe work environment. However, Toyota finds that it can do both, as by improving employee health and employee relations they are guaranteed a more motivated staff, and hence a more efficient staff; this guarantees more money for the business as well as more safety for the employees.
Finally one must understand that not all work environments can be made safer. For example, in the case of coal mining, a company only has limited ways of making the work environment safe. While companies may be able to ensure some safety precautions, they may not be able to provide all the safety measures necessary. In other words, a mining company has limited ability to control the air quality within a coal mine and therefore it cannot control the risk of employees getting blacklung. In other words, regardless of the intent of the company, some jobs are simply dangerous in nature.
In conclusion, while at first it may seem to make financial sense to improve the safety of the work environment sometimes it truly does not make financial sense. Furthermore, financial sense may not be the only issue a company faces. Other types of analyses must be made such as the social ramifications of an unsafe work environment and the overall ability of a company to improve that environment 。 Before any decision is made, all this things must be considered, not simply the reduction of payroll expenses.
上面就是GRE官方满分范文的全部内容,这篇GRE官方范文的 字数高达599words, 充分体现了字数为王的判分倾向。另外这篇官方范文是 标准的五段制,首段、GRE末端,中间三段,看上去非常舒服;而且整篇文章没有陈词滥调、没有满篇废话的模板式语言。这也是这篇文章能作为GRE官方范文的最主要原因。
Hackney:“马车”变“平庸”
关于大象你不知道的12件事
Potboiler: 粗制滥造的作品
河南省某高中为防止谈恋爱分散注意力在食堂划红线
圣经典故: The salt of the earth
Canard: 流传、谣言
伦敦出动鸽子监测未来三天空气污染情况
chaperon: 女伴
Brass ring: 发财机会!
A can of worms: 问题成堆的地方
Scapegoat: 替罪羊
Teetotal: 滴酒不沾
Potluck: 家常便饭
Dance Macabre: 死亡之舞
圣经故事: The apple of ones eye
White elephant: 沉重的包袱
Spiv: 骗子,票贩子
爱是amour,爱是rak
Goldbrick: 金砖变懒汉
Have cold feet: 打退堂鼓
2016习近平两会上经济话题有哪些新语新论?
研究表明练习太极等传统运动可以改善心血管疾病
Carry the can: 代人受过
意大利米兰孕妇坐公交车可凭“徽章”求让座
Cold turkey: 突然完全戒毒
圣经典故: The writing on the wall
Pinkie: 小手指
Adams Apple: 喉结
满足你对咖啡因的需求——便宜省时的可嚼咖啡块
Codswallop: 废话
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |