Critical Reasoning

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

A. Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave.
B. Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.
C. Workers who would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.
D. People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.
E. Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error.

(C)

IMO B

If many accidents result due to error by the employees not holding safety certi. so even if the employer bars anybody with drinking problem from holding saftey certificate will not reduce the risk of accidents .

C is not correct bcoz there is no mention of losing jobs .

IMO B

Agree that C is out of scope here.

one more B buddy

Imo D

IMO C

Great question and I narrowed it down to B and C. However, due to the conclusion stating that any employer should bar anyone that has been treated for a drinking problem, C is the most logical answer IMO. C undermines this statement because workers will be hiding their problem and not seeking treatment, which will have a negative impact.

Great question and I narrowed it down to B and C. However, due to the conclusion stating that any employer should bar anyone that has been treated for a drinking problem, C is the most logical answer IMO. C undermines this statement because workers will be hiding their problem and not seeking treatment, which will have a negative impact.

Answer is (C).


The argument talks about accidents happening among employees having safety-sensitive jobs. (B) talks about employees who doesn't safety-sensitive jobs.

showbu,

What is the OA?

Thanks

C for me.

B talks about non safety sensitive jobs. Hence no impact on the argument.

In B, It says, Many accidents. MANY is not equal to MOST. So, B is wrong.

IMO C.

IMO C ... treatment and sensitive work are both significant subjects to define not only just sensitive work on B.

I see a,c, e, all undermine the argument. pls, help