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

Redeem

law for federal

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:36 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:620

law for federal

by heymayank08 » Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:08 am
It has been against the law for federal agencies
and federal contractors to discriminate against a
qualified job applicant because of a disability.
Now that Congress has approved legislation to
expand these existing provisions to cover private
industry as well, the number of disabled people
who are involuntarily unemployed will drop
substantially.
The author of the above argument must be
assuming which of the following?
(A) Many congressmen were reluctant to pass
the new legislation to prevent
discrimination against the disabled.
(B) Some private employers in the past
deliberately chose not to hire qualified but
disabled job applicants.
(C) The federal government currently employs
more disabled people than does private
industry.
(D) The approved legislation would stop
discrimination against the disabled in the
public and private sectors.
(E) Many disabled people voluntarily choose
to remain unemployed.

[spoiler]OA: B pls explain[/spoiler]
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:09 pm

by HBK » Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:12 pm
Option B is kind of an obvious assumption otherwise the whole argument will be meaningless.
Option E might look tempting and would have been the correct choice if the word "some" was used in place of "many".
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 7:44 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by agarwalmanoj2000 » Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:09 pm
Conclusion: The number of disabled people who are involuntarily unemployed will drop substantially.

(A) Many congressmen were reluctant to pass the new legislation to prevent discrimination against the disabled. => Out of scope. Congressmen's intention is not related to conclusion.
(B) Some private employers in the past deliberately chose not to hire qualified but disabled job applicants. => Negate this option - Private employers in the past hired disabled applicant. If this is true then disabled applicants will not have new employment opportunities, hence disabled unemployment will not drop. Conclusion falls apart, so this the assumption.
(C) The federal government currently employs more disabled people than does private industry. => Out of scope. Comparison between fg and pi is not related to conclusion.
(D) The approved legislation would stop discrimination against the disabled in the public and private sectors. => Out of scope. Unemployment and not Discrimination is discussed the argument.
(E) Many disabled people voluntarily choose to remain unemployed. => Out of scope. Argument is on unemployment and not discrimination.

HTH
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:15 am
Thanked: 149 times
Followed by:32 members
GMAT Score:760

by avik.ch » Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:24 pm
It has been against the law for federal agencies and federal contractors to discriminate against a
qualified job applicant because of a disability - facts/ background information.

Now that Congress has approved legislation to expand these existing provisions to cover private
industry as well - premise/ an action taken

the number of disabled people who are involuntarily unemployed will drop substantially. - conclusion./ prediction of the author based on the premise.

Now the assumption must be corresponding to the prediction - since the law is made for private industry will lead to a decrease in disabled people who are involuntarily unemployed - it must be that the private industry was playing a major role for the large mass of disabled people who are involuntarily unemployed. (B states this)

The other way of thinking is causality :

Congress approving legislation to expand these existing provisions to cover private
industry (cause) ------------------> the number of disabled people who are involuntarily unemployed will drop substantially (effect)

B shows that these two events are interlinked.


Hope this helps !!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1