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.
雅思阅读材料:一位伊朗妇女从石头死刑下死里逃生
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(12)
雅思阅读材料:"Horse Dragon," Colossus Dinosaurs Found in Utah
雅思阅读材料:50,000 Britons on boiler-room 'suckers' list
雅思阅读真题相似文章:人类文字进化史
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(7)
雅思阅读备考常见疑问解答
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(3)
雅思阅读模拟真题:Study Finds Web Antifraud Measure Ineffective
题目?文章?三种方法拿下雅思阅读
雅思阅读真题相似文章:生物防治病虫害
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(5)
雅思阅读:英国饮食文化之早餐篇
雅思阅读真题词汇:棱皮龟
雅思阅读材料:自杀式炸弹袭击者上英国大学?
雅思阅读高频词汇:科技类
雅思阅读材料:恐龙灭绝(中英)
《剑桥雅思7》阅读题型分析
雅思阅读搭配题解题技巧讲解
雅思阅读技巧之定位词
雅思阅读出题十大原则
雅思阅读材料:Cancun meeting reaches climate change agreement
考场注意事项:四步应对雅思阅读
雅思阅读List of heading解题技巧
雅思阅读材料:How come you didn't see the whole of the Moon?
雅思阅读模拟试题:How to increase sales
决定雅思阅读高分的四大要素
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(6)
雅思备考须知:阅读5月考试趋势分析
雅思阅读背景材料:联合国机构名称
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |