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

Redeem

Parental leave

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:33 am
Thanked: 10 times

Parental leave

by sankruth » Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:30 am
A law requiring companies to offer employees unpaid time off to care for their children will harm the economic competitiveness of our nation’s businesses. Companies must be free to set their own employment policies without mandated parental-leave regulations.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion of the argument above?
(A) A parental-leave law will serve to strengthen the family as a social institution in this country.
(B) Many businesses in this country already offer employees some form of parental leave.
(C) Some of the countries with the most economically competitive businesses have strong parental-leave regulations.
(D) Only companies with one hundred or more employees would be subject to the proposed parental-leave law.
(E) In most polls, a majority of citizens say they favor passage of a parental-leave law.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 645
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:37 am
Location: India
Thanked: 34 times
Followed by:5 members

by camitava » Mon Jan 14, 2008 4:34 am
As u r back, I am also! ha ha ha! A PJ... However, IMO B. Is it correct? What's the OA?
This time I will give the explanation -
If many business organizations are already having some form of parental law, then how come a company will decide to give the parental leave or not! I think, it's already in the market and the conclusion will be meaningless. Are u getting me, Sankruth? I am eager to know the OA?
Correct me If I am wrong


Regards,

Amitava
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:33 am
Thanked: 10 times

by sankruth » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:16 am
Trust me, you will hear a lot from me for I have my test in 2 weeks time... and Im s**ting myself! :lol:

Thanks! We seem to think alike... I too chose B but the 1000CR says C.

Im not convinced with C bcause the to take C we must assume all other factors in this country and "some countries" where the regulation has ben successful are exactly same to make a fair comparison.

If anyone has a different opinion, please do contribute!
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:21 am
(C) is the correct answer.

The author's main justification (i.e. evidence) for banning parental leave laws is that such laws will harm the economic competitiveness of the nation's businesses. However, the author provides no evidence that such harm will in fact occur.

Only answer (C) even addresses the issue of economic competitiveness, which makes it attractive even without analysis.

Answer (C) says that there are some extremely economically competitive countries that have the very laws to which the author objects. If that's the case, then it doesn't look like those laws had the negative impact to which the author alludes. If we remove the author's main justification for her conclusion, we greatly weaken that conclusion.

It's important to remember that weakening is NOT the same thing as disproving. Is it possible that those other countries would have been even more competitive without those laws? Sure, but we don't want to engage in that kind of speculation on test day. Answer (C) raises doubt in our mind over the negative impact of the laws, and that's exactly what a weakening question demands.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 645
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:37 am
Location: India
Thanked: 34 times
Followed by:5 members

by camitava » Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:17 am
Stuart, now I have understood your approach! But tell me one thing - what is wrong with the way we, I mean, Sankruth and me, thought? OK! It's true that the conclusion is saying - companies SHOULD DO - and should not take care of what is currently working in the system. If it is, then I am convinced with your approach otherwise Stuart - don't mind pls - I am not being able to agree with you.
Are you getting me? I mean are you getting what I want to say?
Correct me If I am wrong


Regards,

Amitava
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:26 am

by khanshainur » Tue May 10, 2016 3:06 am
i feel it's B
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1