Both of the passage and the speaker mention about the new policy of working four days a week. The passage claims that employers are likely to earn more money by adopting this policy. Also, the article suggest that the enterprises hire more workers so that they can insure the same amount of job being done. On the other hand, the lecturer refutes these points, because the cost of staff training, medical care, more computers and more office space will increase along with the new policy.
Secondly, the passage mentioned working four days a week and hiring more people will make the workers happier and lessen the possibility of overworking and making mistake. However, the speaker said through the thinking of saving money, although a company allows their staffs to work four days a week, doesn't mean that they will hire more people. The company may expect their workers to accomplish their five-day job within just four days. This may still cause mistake making and exhausted workers.
Last, the article and the lecturer both states that to employees, working four days a week does allow them to spend more time on what they want to do, but the lecturer adds that this can put employees in risk of reducing of life qualities. To explain, the employee who demands to work four days a week won't be a preference to companies, and even if they get hired, they might not be chosen to promote.
In sum, the reading and the lecturer hold opposite ideas to working four days a week. The reading shows that it is beneficial to both companies and individuals, while the lecturer tells us that it may end up to have the opposite consequence of the reading's assertion.
Secondly, the passage mentioned working four days a week and hiring more people will make the workers happier and lessen the possibility of overworking and making mistake. However, the speaker said through the thinking of saving money, although a company allows their staffs to work four days a week, doesn't mean that they will hire more people. The company may expect their workers to accomplish their five-day job within just four days. This may still cause mistake making and exhausted workers.
Last, the article and the lecturer both states that to employees, working four days a week does allow them to spend more time on what they want to do, but the lecturer adds that this can put employees in risk of reducing of life qualities. To explain, the employee who demands to work four days a week won't be a preference to companies, and even if they get hired, they might not be chosen to promote.
In sum, the reading and the lecturer hold opposite ideas to working four days a week. The reading shows that it is beneficial to both companies and individuals, while the lecturer tells us that it may end up to have the opposite consequence of the reading's assertion.
