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.
适合练习听力的英文电影推荐
资讯采访权 rights in newsgathering
看美片必备英语常识
相亲男女最常说的三句谎言
[职场]面试中的绝对禁忌语
[口语]交通文明 road civility的英文表达
[翻译]“歉意”怎么说出口?
“跑酷”也是艺术 Parkour
盘点与“虎”有关的谚语
[口语]最容易让人误解的英语词语(第一波)
美国人最爱用的N句个性短语
[口语]土地复垦用英语怎么说?
15个万能演讲句型
与老外过招的百句必用语
潘基文就本拉登之死的讲话
[口语]怎样用英语在麦当劳点餐
[口语]离婚协议书 divorce settlement
英语简单绕口令
[口语]女生常谈的话题fat talk
[口语]美国政府“放大假”?
美国人最爱说的几句口头禅
[口语]宾馆预定对话实例
[口语]英文电邮中的高频句
双鸟在林,不如一鸟在手
节日口语:十一句话搞定圣诞礼物
时尚新宠“微博”用英语怎么表达
职场中如何巧用英语短信
[口语]开车出游,表达多多
“代驾”英文怎么说
节省空间的“胶囊旅馆”
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |