Scroll for the OA Aprachich1987 wrote:What's the OA?
In the effort to fire
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2330
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:26 members
- kvcpk
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1893
- Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
- Thanked: 215 times
- Followed by:7 members
I dont remember exactly. But I think it is from 1000 CR. OA is Amundasingh123 wrote:Hi can u reveal the source ?kvcpk wrote:In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only
Anyways, its a poorly written question.
Check this post:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/1000-cr-ters ... t1503.html
"Once you start working on something,
don't be afraid of failure and don't abandon it.
People who work sincerely are the happiest."
Chanakya quotes (Indian politician, strategist and writer, 350 BC-275BC)
don't be afraid of failure and don't abandon it.
People who work sincerely are the happiest."
Chanakya quotes (Indian politician, strategist and writer, 350 BC-275BC)
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2330
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:26 members
In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only
Sttmnt 1 can be inferred frm The Bolded part
The stimulus says that the Job security should be reduced by making it easier to fire the Civil Service employees.The stimlus nowhere says that more Govt workers should be fired if you want more efficiency.
The Stmulus nowhere says Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only
Sttmnt 1 can be inferred frm The Bolded part
The stimulus says that the Job security should be reduced by making it easier to fire the Civil Service employees.The stimlus nowhere says that more Govt workers should be fired if you want more efficiency.
The Stmulus nowhere says Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
- chendawg
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:56 am
- Location: Philadelphia
- Thanked: 13 times
- Followed by:4 members
- GMAT Score:660
I completely agree with the above explanation for III. Civil Service employees COULD do 99% of the work, yet only make up 5% of the workforce. Thus this does not need to be true. However I. HAS to be true because if the author DID not believe too much job security CAN have a negative influence on workers, then the author can't lead to the conclusion that government is inefficient because C.S. employees loaf.FightWithGMAT wrote:This is an inference question....kvcpk wrote:Thankyou!! But I am not completely convincedbeatthegmatinsept wrote:I am no expert, but I think it is. I in this case is like a given, the question is probably whether you pick or don't pick the other option.kvcpk wrote:I have a query:
Is it OK to infer a Generalised statement from a particular example?
Here I is Generalisation, while the passage only has example.
What's the OA?
OA is A.
Does the passage say that inefficiency in gov is proportional to number of employees in gov.
It could be the case that gov is inefficient because the civil service officers are responsible for most of inefficiency, and such officers are only 10%.
90 % are not civil service officers.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 10:19 am
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 10 times
Tricky problem!, but I think the answer is A.
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on works. This is a very close and logical flow from the statement, which makes two distinct points--firstly, that Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, and secondly, that because they know how hard it is to be fired they tend to loaf. Therefore, their job security causes them to underperform.
II. More government workers should be fired. This can not be confirmed in the statement, because the final sentence is unclear about which statement explains why the government is so inefficient. Is it because it costs up to $100,000 just to fire someone OR is it because people loaf due to job security? It's too ambiguous to tell.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees. There is no reference to number at all in the statement.
Therefore, A.
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on works. This is a very close and logical flow from the statement, which makes two distinct points--firstly, that Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, and secondly, that because they know how hard it is to be fired they tend to loaf. Therefore, their job security causes them to underperform.
II. More government workers should be fired. This can not be confirmed in the statement, because the final sentence is unclear about which statement explains why the government is so inefficient. Is it because it costs up to $100,000 just to fire someone OR is it because people loaf due to job security? It's too ambiguous to tell.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees. There is no reference to number at all in the statement.
Therefore, A.
- abhi6136
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:03 am
- Location: Kolkata
- GMAT Score:710
B
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers. (Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf)
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees. (the government is so inefficient.)
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers. (Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf)
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees. (the government is so inefficient.)
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:36 pm
- Thanked: 29 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
the answer is simply A. Here is why:
I - author is stating it directly in the text "Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf"
II - It is not mentioned anywhere (only playing with republicans' emotions )
III - Author says that because civil servants loaf around, the government is inefficient... it doesn't talk about numbers/ratios anywhere. Author doesn't say that civil servants are majority or minority etc.
In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only
I - author is stating it directly in the text "Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf"
II - It is not mentioned anywhere (only playing with republicans' emotions )
III - Author says that because civil servants loaf around, the government is inefficient... it doesn't talk about numbers/ratios anywhere. Author doesn't say that civil servants are majority or minority etc.
In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only
---------------------------------
Everything is possible in this world. Even the word Impossible says - I'm possible
Everything is possible in this world. Even the word Impossible says - I'm possible
I am still not sure about III, if government if inefficient due to civil service employees, why can't I infer that most of the employees are from civil service.
Are we ignoring III because the statement could be true or false?
Thanks
Are we ignoring III because the statement could be true or false?
Thanks
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:36 pm
- Thanked: 29 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
Yes, this is correct. We are given info about the productivity levels but not numbers. It is possible that civil servants are few in numbers but they cause much more inefficiencies in the system (e.g. because they don't work, folks below them in hierarchy don't work either and so on, causing total inefficiency). It is also possible that civil servants are majority in govt. causing govt. to be inefficient.shrivast wrote:I am still not sure about III, if government if inefficient due to civil service employees, why can't I infer that most of the employees are from civil service.
Are we ignoring III because the statement could be true or false?
Thanks
---------------------------------
Everything is possible in this world. Even the word Impossible says - I'm possible
Everything is possible in this world. Even the word Impossible says - I'm possible
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:39 pm
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:04 am
- Thanked: 5 times
- Followed by:4 members
Clearly the answer is A
I agree as discussed above that there is no mention about the numbers. Let's try to think this way isn't it possible for very few Civil Service employees (say less than 50 percent) who are the reason for all the damage caused to the government.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please "THANK" if you like my explanation :p
I agree as discussed above that there is no mention about the numbers. Let's try to think this way isn't it possible for very few Civil Service employees (say less than 50 percent) who are the reason for all the damage caused to the government.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please "THANK" if you like my explanation :p
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:50 pm
The last line This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
Isn't the word 'this' pointing to the first 2 sentences which talks about the Civil service employees only. So why should III be left out ?
Isn't the word 'this' pointing to the first 2 sentences which talks about the Civil service employees only. So why should III be left out ?
- Gaurav 2013-fall
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:45 pm
- Thanked: 12 times
- GMAT Score:700