BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

CR -- TOUGH 1

Expert replies
by Gunjan99 » Wed Apr 09, 2008 10:14 am
Barnes: The two newest employees at this
company have salaries that are too high for
the simple tasks normally assigned to new
employees and duties that are too complex
for inexperienced workers. Hence, the
salaries and the complexity of the duties of
these two newest employees should be
reduced.
Which one of the following is an assumption on
which Barnes’s argument depends?
(A) The duties of the two newest employees are
not less complex than any others in the
company.
(B) It is because of the complex duties assigned
that the two newest employees are being
paid more than is usually paid to newly
hired employees.
(C) The two newest employees are not
experienced at their occupations.
(D) Barnes was not hired at a
higher-than-average starting salary.
(E) The salaries of the two newest employees
are no higher than the salaries that other
companies pay for workers with a similar
level of experience.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Re: CR -- TOUGH 1

by simplyjat » Wed Apr 09, 2008 10:23 am
Gunjan99 wrote: (C) The two newest employees are not experienced at their occupations.
The argument talks about two things; high salaries for new employees and complex tasks for inexperienced employees. The argument also tells about about new induction of the employees but does not tell anything about the experience of the new recruits...
simplyjat
Join the discussion

by yalephd2007 » Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:13 am
I will go with E
Join the discussion

by ArunTangri » Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:17 am
The answer is C because:

1) The employees are getting salaries higher than the new employees who does the simple tasks.
2) Their job complexity is also high.

Author asked to reduce the salaries and complexities because he think that the employees aren't competent enough to do these jobs. So he assumes the lack of experience for these new employees.
Join the discussion

by vibhutirs » Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:30 am
C, because its been assumed they dont have any prior experience.
Join the discussion

by abhi75 » Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:47 pm
I will go with C. Salaries should be reduced because the task are too simple and duties are complex for their experience.

Now the conclusion mentions salaries should be reduced which is related to simple task so the assumption has to be something about the experience.


A - If we apply the negation technique - The duties of the two newest employees are less complex than any others in the company. Does this affect the argument that salaries should be reduced of the new emplyees. No, other employees maybe have more experience and therefore capable of handling complex assignments. The duties of the new employees may still be complex for thier experience and the conclusion is not weakened.

B - if this was weaken the argument question then this might have been the answer but for assumption its not.

C - mentions about the experience and fills the gap between premise and conclusion.

D - The argument is about new employees not barnes.

E - Again with negation test, the argument is not affected.

Sorry for the lengthy explanation. Can someone please mention the OA.
Join the discussion

by jamess » Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:29 am
Choice C should be correct. Quite clearly satisfies the premises.
Check out <a href="https://gmatadvice.blocked">gmatadvice.blocked</a> for useful tips to ace the GMAT.
<a href="https://gmatadvice.blocked/2008/04/ ... tml">ebook on critical reasoning</a> launched.
Join the discussion

by Gunjan99 » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:48 pm
OA is C

Thanks for explanation. :)
Join the discussion

by peter.p.81 » Tue May 10, 2016 10:55 pm
i will go with C
Join the discussion