Beat The GMAT

Avinash · Guest

Hi All,
I have been finding this forum extremely useful for my preparations. I have a couple of days left before my GMAT now and am doing some last minute preparations. Can some of you rate the following essay for me and let me know how can i enhance it further.

thanks,
Avinash

"It is no longer cost-effective for the Perks Company to continue offering its employees a generous package of benefits and incentives year after year. In periods when national unemployment rates are low, Perks may need to offer such a package in order to attract and keep good employees, but since national unemployment rates are now high, Perks does not need to offer the same benefits and incentives. The money thus saved could be better used to replace the existing plant machinery with more technologically sophisticated equipment, or even to build an additional plant."

A perfunctory glance at the article may convince one that Perks Company could advantageously reduce the package of benefits and incentives it offers to its employees and thereby use the money saved to buy sophisticated machinery or even a new plant. However on perusal of the article, I find it to be seemingly unconvincing as it is based on some unreasonable assumptions and fallacious logic. The article is flawed on three points.

First, the author implies that Perks has been giving generous benefits and incentives year after year. Hence, this could be one main reason why Perks is able to retain its employees over the years and now if the management of Perks decides to reduce the benefits and incentives, many of its employees could leave their jobs and take up more lucrative ones. Moreover, it is an accepted fact that the cost of retaining an employee is always lesser in comparison to inducting a new employee.

Second, the author reasons his argument by mentioning that the national unemployment rates are currently too high. However, he does not mention anything about the unemployment rate in the specific industry to which Perks caters. It is very much possible that there is a dearth of skilled employees in that specific industry in which case Perks strategy could prove to be counter productive.

Third, in today's world of rising prices, replacing the existing machinery with more sophisticated ones or buying an additional plant might be too expensive when compared to the savings that Perks will make by reducing the incentives and benefits of its employees. Hence the author's claim that Perks could replace the existing machinery or buy new plants with these savings is unacceptable.

In conclusion, the argument is poorly supported with relevant facts and is not based on sound reasoning. To strengthen his argument, the author would have to show more statistics about the unemployment rate in the particular industry and also the costs that Perks will save by this new strategy in addition to the costs of replacing machinery or buying new plants.

Back to top

Guest · Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:44 pm

5.5 - 6

Really well organized and well analzyed!

Back to top

Beat The GMAT

Can someone rate my essay please

Free GMAT Prep Resources

GMAT Prep Discounts

Free Upcoming GMAT Events

Latest GMAT Articles

Latest GMAT Videos

Popular Resources