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

Redeem

When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 am
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:5 members

When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is

by RBBmba@2014 » Mon Apr 11, 2016 6:30 am
When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at the factory for safety precautions and machinery maintenance than when demand is low. Thus the average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low and less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance.

Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times.
(B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly.
(C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times.
(D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory.
(E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models.

OA:B

P.S: I'm stuck between Option B and D. Why Option D won't weaken the conclusion ?

@Verbal Experts - please share your detail analysis on this CR.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:09 am
RBBmba@2014 wrote:When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at the factory for safety precautions and machinery maintenance than when demand is low. Thus the average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low and less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance.

Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times.
(B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly.
(C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times.
(D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory.
(E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models.

OA:B

P.S: I'm stuck between Option B and D. Why Option D won't weaken the conclusion ?

@Verbal Experts - please share your detail analysis on this CR.
The conclusion: High demand = fewer on-the-job accidents.
The premise: High demand --> more $ spent on training/safety

If we're trying to weaken the conclusion, we want to show that high demand does not lead to fewer accidents. Well, if the conclusion is predicated on the notion that the workplace will be safer during times of high demand because of the increased $ invested in safety infrastructure, and times of high demand lead to an increase in hiring without time to train the new employees properly, that certainly weakens the notion that high demand leads to fewer accidents. So that's the justification for B

D is either irrelevant or a strengthener. The argument is about the relationship between demand,safety-spending, and number of accidents. D doesn't directly address that relationship. Does the prospect of an award actually correspond to fewer accidents? If we don't know, it isn't relevant. Alternatively, one could argue that it's a strengthener, as the safety award could serve as an enticement to reduce accidents. We're trying to show that high demand does not necessarily correspond to fewer accidents.
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 am
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:5 members

by RBBmba@2014 » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:49 am
DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:...as the safety award could serve as an enticement to reduce accidents.
Hi Dave,
My confusion with D,actually arises from this point.

I interpreted it in this way: as the management sponsors a monthly safety award,so it's likely that there is a NEED to reduce the accidents (even when demand for a factory's products is high) -- then this safety award program could motivate workers to work more cautiously to bag the award,avoiding accidents.

It implies that the accidents are NOT really low as stated in the conclusion (otherwise,perhaps there won't be a NEED to have this "monthly safety award" program in place). Thus the conclusion is WEAKENED.

Could you please help where I'm getting this wrong ?
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Wed Apr 13, 2016 11:28 am
RBBmba@2014 wrote:
DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:...as the safety award could serve as an enticement to reduce accidents.
Hi Dave,
My confusion with D,actually arises from this point.

I interpreted it in this way: as the management sponsors a monthly safety award,so it's likely that there is a NEED to reduce the accidents (even when demand for a factory's products is high) -- then this safety award program could motivate workers to work more cautiously to bag the award,avoiding accidents.

It implies that the accidents are NOT really low as stated in the conclusion (otherwise,perhaps there won't be a NEED to have this "monthly safety award" program in place). Thus the conclusion is WEAKENED.

Could you please help where I'm getting this wrong ?
Remember, the conclusion isn't that accidents rarely happen when demand is high. It's that the accident rate when demand is high is lower than the accident rate when demand is low. Imagine a work place where 10% of the workers get injured each week when demand is low and where 2% of the workers get injured each week when demand is high. (Note: do not apply for a job at this establishment :)) Surely it's possible that managers could conclude that they could improve on that 2% mark, and so offer an award to divisions that can reduce the accident rate lower still. So the existence of an award for even better performance isn't inconsistent with an inverse correlation between demand and injury rate.
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 am
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:5 members

by RBBmba@2014 » Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:19 am
Hi Dave,
I hear you here. But still some clarification is required to clear the doubt!

By common sense, isn't it more likely to have a "monthly safety award" program (in order to reduce the accident rate) when the number of accidents is high (or at least, NOT that LOW) than to have it when the number of accidents is comparatively lower ?
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:52 am
RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi Dave,
I hear you here. But still some clarification is required to clear the doubt!

By common sense, isn't it more likely to have a "monthly safety award" program (in order to reduce the accident rate) when the number of accidents is high (or at least, NOT that LOW) than to have it when the number of accidents is comparatively lower ?
I see what you're saying. And I don't disagree with the logic. But just because something seems generally logical, doesn't mean that we can assume it's true. Take this fine site, for example. There are all sorts of fun little awards/badges that users receive for getting to some critical threshold for posts. That doesn't necessarily mean that post-levels were previously low, and that the awards were a response to this disappointingly low level. Put another way, one can certainly provide an incentive to improve even if one is already doing well. Or, viewed through another lens, it's possible that once safety levels began to improve, management grew excited and wanted to see if they could improve safety levels even more by passing out awards. Maybe safety levels were so dismal before that winning an award for having only 'x' number of terrible accidents would feel like a hollow victory. (And an insult to all the workers at home nursing their work-related injuries.) The point is that we don't know - the mere existence of an award can't shed definitive light on accident rates.
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 am
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:5 members

by RBBmba@2014 » Fri Apr 15, 2016 9:46 am
Again - I hear you here. It seems to be a tricky one!

So,although it's NOT a MUST BE TRUE Question (such as ASSUMPTION CR), it appears that here we've sort of comparative scenario between OA and E in terms of which option likely sheds MORE definitive light on accident rates. Right ?

Now, OA becomes a better choice on the above aspect because E comparatively lacks this definitive aspect, as mentioned above.

Sounds good ?
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:11 am
RBBmba@2014 wrote:Again - I hear you here. It seems to be a tricky one!

So,although it's NOT a MUST BE TRUE Question (such as ASSUMPTION CR), it appears that here we've sort of comparative scenario between OA and E in terms of which option likely sheds MORE definitive light on accident rates. Right ?

Now, OA becomes a better choice on the above aspect because E comparatively lacks this definitive aspect, as mentioned above.

Sounds good ?
Sounds good to me:)
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:13 am
RBBmba@2014 wrote:Again - I hear you here. It seems to be a tricky one!

So,although it's NOT a MUST BE TRUE Question (such as ASSUMPTION CR), it appears that here we've sort of comparative scenario between OA and E in terms of which option likely sheds MORE definitive light on accident rates. Right ?

Now, OA becomes a better choice on the above aspect because E comparatively lacks this definitive aspect, as mentioned above.

Sounds good ?
Sounds good to me:)
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1