本帖最后由 Jerry19960912 于 2016-9-24 17:20 编辑 |
The reading and listening materials have a conflict of opinions about the four-day working mode. The writer believes that a four-day work goes a long way when it comes to the economy as well as the individual, which is contradicted by the following lecture.
Firstly, the author states that the shortened workweek would increase company’s profits because employees would feel more at ease and as a consequence, they would make fewer costly mistakes in their work. Plus, the money saved can be used to hire more employees to work to get more task done. However, the lecture opposes this claim by saying that the company would cost heavily when the working days are shortened because the company has to spend more on providing training medical care to new employees. And more employees also requires more office space and computers, it's a cut off of company’s profit.
Secondly, the passage claims that the shortened day workers decrease the unemployment rate. However, the speaker views this issue from an opposite angle. According to him, companies usually do not hire new workers because it’s a huge amount of money and they with believe employees would do the same amount of work as the five-day workers do, with this highly expectation, workers run a high risk of being forced to work overtime. unpleasantly
Finally, the writer argues that more available time could improve the quality of employees' lives by spending some quality of time with their families, pursuing private hobbies, or enjoying leisure activities. By contrast, in accordance with the professor, this view doesn't hold water. Employees' lives would not be improved because companies prefer five-day workers and shortened day workers pass over the opportunity for advancement, when there is a employee cut off, they are usually the first to lose their jobs.