Writing Feedback / 'linking rising accidents to fatigued workers' - GRE Argument [5]

Please help on editing this essay.

The following appeared in a memo from the Board of Directors of Butler Manufacturing.
"During the past year, workers at Butler Manufacturing reported 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. A recent government study reports that fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers are significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents. Therefore, we recommend that Butler Manufacturing shorten each of its work shifts by one hour. Shorter shifts will allow Butler to improve its safety record by ensuring that its employees are adequately rested."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

The conclusion of the given argument, "reducing each of Butler Manufacturing's work shifts by one hour to improve safety record," rests weakly on three primary assumptions. First, It assumes that Butler Manufacturing and Panoply industries both have similar characteristics of production and environment. Second, it is based on reported injuries only and does not provide any further advantages of being reported as injured. Third, It presumes that employee will use the shortened hour to rest.

First, the author compares the percentage of accidents Butler Manufacturing and Panoply Industries, without providing any further details about the nature of production, work force, and the amount of automation used in these two companies. Do both companies produce similar products using the same technology and posses identical work force and work environment? Is the data comparison still relevant, if Panoply has more automation, while Butler concentrates on manual operations? In this case, it would follow logically that Butler has more accidents as more human dexterity is involved. Thus, providing a study on similarities between the two companies would support the recommendation.

Second, the author further states thst thirty percent more accidents are reported at Butler, How about the unreported or minor injuries? Is this also more at Butler? Therefore, minor or unreported injuries. Moreover, is there any extra benefit at Panoply if somebody is injured such as getting paid leave or early retirement contrary to no such benefits at Butler? Are the accident reports helpful in seeking financial advantage or disadvantage which could trigger more reported injuries. If the author could show the similarities in these issue as well, the case would possess strong veracity.

Furthermore, as stated on the survey provided by the author, it is acceptable that sleep deprived and tired workers are more susceptible to work area accidents, but it is not clear in the passage that workers use the proposed reduced hours to rest or sleep. The result attribute to more adverse effects if workers look for other part time jobs in order to compensate for reduce pay because of reduced hours. Having assumed this, if the passage could answer whether the pay would be same or reduced proportionately, it would help to support the recommendation. To strengthen the logic, a survey among the workers of Butler about how they would use one extra hour, would help a lot. If a large portion of the worker said yes, "they would rest indifferent to the amount of pay," the author's recommendation would be more logical.

To conclude, this argument relies predominantly on its assumptions -denying any one of these assumptions results in a weak or, in some cases, invalid conclusion. Nevertheless, the belief that reduced hours lessen worksite injuries may in fact be true, despite its not being proven with the premises given and assumptions made by the author. To strengthen the argument, the author would need to not only address these three assumptions but also to more firmly establish similarities between the two mentioned companies. This explication answers the possible questions of the argument and hence makes the argument less flawed. In the words of Leonardo da Vinci, "Oh Lord, you gave us everything at the price of fatigue!" An argument conclusively linking rising accidents to fatigued workers would be a strong argument indeed.