Topic 3
Reading
In the United States, employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day. However, many employees want to work a four-day week and are willing to accept less pay in order to do so. A mandatory policy requiring companies to offer their employees the option of working a four-day workweek for four-fifths (80 percent) of their normal pay would benefit the economy as a whole as well as the individual companies and the employees who decided to take the option.
The shortened workweek would increase company profits because employees would feel more rested and alert, and as a result, they would make fewer costly errors in their work. Hiring more staff to ensure that the same amount of work would be accomplished would not result in additional payroll costs because four-day employees would only be paid 80 percent of the normal rate. In the end, companies would have fewer overworked and error-prone employees for the same money, which would increase company benefits.
For the country as a whole, one of the primary benefits of offering this option to employees is that it would reduce unemployment rate. If many full-time employees started working fewer hours, some of their workload would have to be shifted to others. Thus, for every four employees who went on an 80 percent week, a new employee could be hired at the 80 percent rate.
Finally, the option of a four-day workweek would be better for individual employees. Employees who could afford a lower salary in exchange for more free time could improve the quality of their lives by spending the extra time with their families, pursuing private interests or enjoying leisure activities.
Topic 3
Listening
Offering employees the options of four-day work week won’t affect company profits, economic conditions or the lives of employees in the ways the reading suggests?
First, offering a four-day work week will probably force companies to spend more, possibly a lot more. Adding more workers means putting much more money into providing training and medical benefits. Remember, the costs of things like health benefits can be the same whether employees works four days or five. And having more employees also requires more office space and more computers. These additional costs will quickly cut into company profits.
Second, with respect to overall employment, it doesn’t follow that when some employees choose a four-day work week, many more jobs will become available. Hiring a new worker is costly, as I argued a moment ago; and companies have other options: they might just choose to ask their employees to work overtime to make up the difference. Worst, companies might raise their expectations; they might start to expect their four-day employees can do the same amount of work they used to do in five days. If this happens, then no additional jobs will be created, and current jobs will become more unpleasant.
Finally, while a four-day work week offers employees more free time to invest on their personal lives, it also presents some risks that could end up reducing their quality of their live. Working a shorter week can decrease employees’ job stabilities and harm their chances for advancing their careers. Four-day employees are likely to be the first to lose their jobs during an economic downturn. They may also be passed over for promotions because companies might prefer to have five-day employees in the management positions to ensure continuous coverage and consistent supervision for the entire work week.
Topic 3
Answer
The reading and listening passages have a conflict of opinion about the proposal of a four-day workweek for eighty percent of salary. The reading passage points out its three benefits, which are contradicted by the following lecture.
First, the reading passage believes that the plan will increase company’s profits because hiring more employees will not increase company’s costs. However, the speaker believes that this is not the case. For one thing, more employees mean more training costs and medical benefits. For another thing, companies will have to spend more on office spaces and computers.
Second, the reading passage argues that the plan will reduce unemployment rate because if employees work fewer hours, companies will have to employ more people. Yet, the speaker holds the opposite opinion. He argues that companies will ask employees to work overtime or raise work expectations instead of hiring more.
Finally, the reading passage points out the plan will improve the quality of lives of employees. However, the speaker believes that this is not the case because employees will be more likely to lose their jobs and less likely to be promoted to higher positions.