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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

When complaints against staff are brought to Human Resources

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorRO » Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:25 am
When complaints against staff are brought to Human Resources at Sarpedon Inc., the Human Resources department cannot always determine whether there was just cause for the complaint. This is usually due to insufficient evidence provided by the claimant. Nevertheless, Sarpedon will sometimes dismiss an employee because of such a complaint, even if unsubstantiated.

Which of the following conclusions can most properly be drawn from the information above?

A Many Sarpedon employees accused of any wrongdoing contest the charge, claiming their own innocence, because they are familiar with Human Resources policy.
B In certain kinds of harassment, victims are reluctant to press charges, for fear of reprisals or unfavorable judgments from other colleagues.
C It is possible that an unsubstantiated complaint could be unfairly held against the employee that it implicates.
D In a 1-on-1 conflict in which the only two employees involved give conflicting view of each other's words and actions, managers have to make a judgment at their own discretion.
E Many of the employees dismissed from Sarpedon would have substantial grounds for a lawsuit concerning their dismissal because of this Human Resources policy.
OA is c

Can anyone figure out what is wrong with option B and C?
Thanks
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by deloitte247 » Sat Apr 28, 2018 12:15 pm
Let's start with the correct option which is OPTION C
In option c, the possibility of an uncorroborated claim of wrongdoing getting unfair, biased and prejudicial treatment against an employee indicted is higher that it's not happening.

For other options, let's see why they are wrong
Option A: The statement does not state in specifics that three indeed exists any protest, contest nor was there an opposition to the allegations.
The complaints leveled against the employees already put them at a disadvantage and stiffens their ability to prove their innocence.

Option B: The statement does not just refer to employees, it also infers that members of the public could open a case against them with the Human Resources Department. In which case, identity remains anonymous whilst been speculative, reprisals would not suffice here because the corporation could lay-of workers in absentia, with uncorroborated claims by merely establishing a case against them.

Option D: This infers a conflicting defense statements would not sway the decisions of the Judges herein, who would rely majorly on the power of discretion and not that of attorney.

Option E: 'cannot always determine whether there was just cause for the complaint.' According to the writer, not exactly all innocent employees are adjudged guilty always. There have existed situations where cases have been fairly conducted and decided
Join the discussion