Deductible of a health insurance

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

Deductible of a health insurance

by reply2spg » Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:36 pm
Each decrease of 10 percent in the deductible of a health insurance policy will increase the length of the tenure of an employee hired at that time, all other factors being equal. For instance, at the NMP corporation, only in the years 1974 through 1977 did the deductible of the health insurance policy increase, and the workers hired in those years stayed with the company an average of five years, as compared with the average employee's tenure of 15 years.

Which of the following can be most reasonably concluded from the statements above?


When a company increases the deductible of its health insurance, its employees will be unhappy.

Companies should secure health insurance with a very small deductible.

A company's highest priority should be to have affordable health insurance deductibles.

A decrease in a company's health insurance deductible is a way of improving that company's financial health.

The length of an employee's tenure may be influenced by factors other than the type of job or the work environment.

No OA but seems to be easy. IMO E
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 11:47 am
Thanked: 22 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:680

by beatthegmatinsept » Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:41 pm
Im stuck between A and E.
A because employees leave when they r unhappy, and anyone having to pay more will be unhappy.
E for obvious reasons that paying more is also a factor.
I would say E, but not very convinced.

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:32 pm
Interesting question. I think you're right with E - remember that in Inference questions the correct answer Must Be True based on the premises.

E is fairly easy to prove:

The length of employment "may be" (soft commitment) determined by "other factors" (like health insurance deductibles).

Because "may be" is soft, and "other factors" includes the deductibles or any other correlative factors that may come with them, E really can't be disputed.

A goes out further on a limb:

When a company (meaning any company) increases the deductible of its health insurance (not allowing for other factors like more comprehensive coverage or higher pay rates to deal with the deductible) its employees will be unhappy.

Our evidence really only points to one company, and it doesn't demonstrate causation, just correlation. So to make a blanket statement like A is really tough to do.

Say, hypothetically, that a company raised its deductible but added extra sick days. Does that mean that employees would automatically be unhappy? Ultimately, the passage says nothing about happiness, so we really can't draw a conclusion about it, and we can also draw hypotheticals that would seem to allow the deductible to increase along with happiness.

A can't quite be proven, and since that's the name of the game on Inference questions, the correct answer must be E.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:17 pm
Thanks Brian, I eliminated A on the same line. Though employees are leaving the company after increase in deductible does not mean that employees are unhappy. It may be coincidence that employees are leaving after increase in deductible. So we can not infer A in this question.

E is strong one here.
Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Interesting question. I think you're right with E - remember that in Inference questions the correct answer Must Be True based on the premises.

E is fairly easy to prove:

The length of employment "may be" (soft commitment) determined by "other factors" (like health insurance deductibles).

Because "may be" is soft, and "other factors" includes the deductibles or any other correlative factors that may come with them, E really can't be disputed.

A goes out further on a limb:

When a company (meaning any company) increases the deductible of its health insurance (not allowing for other factors like more comprehensive coverage or higher pay rates to deal with the deductible) its employees will be unhappy.

Our evidence really only points to one company, and it doesn't demonstrate causation, just correlation. So to make a blanket statement like A is really tough to do.

Say, hypothetically, that a company raised its deductible but added extra sick days. Does that mean that employees would automatically be unhappy? Ultimately, the passage says nothing about happiness, so we really can't draw a conclusion about it, and we can also draw hypotheticals that would seem to allow the deductible to increase along with happiness.

A can't quite be proven, and since that's the name of the game on Inference questions, the correct answer must be E.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:42 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 14 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:710

by ankurmit » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:47 am
Interesting quistion..learnt a ton from it...

@Brain thanks for your wounderful explanation.
--------
Ankur mittal