The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing."During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than

The correlation the vice president draws between productivity and on-the-job accidents is plausible and reasonable. However, the writer weakens his assumptions by failing to identify other factors that may be responsible for on –the- job accidents and showing that Panoply and Quiot plants are comparable.

The vice president assumes that Panoply and Quiot are comparable and this may not be the case. To strengthen his conclusion the writer has to show that both companies are similar in staff strength and processes. For instance if Panoply has more staff than Quiot, the percentages of accidents may be lesser. Relately, the use of percentages may not actually show the true situation. The claim of the vice president would be strengthened if uses actual numbers, that is if Quiot and Panoply are comparable in terms of staff strength.

Also, the writer assumes that productivity would be increased if hours are shortened. This claim is unwarranted because he fails to state why Panoply shortened work hours. Was it for cost cutting rather than productivity reasons? If the company reduced work hours for cost reasons, doing same at Quiot manufacturing may be detrimental. Therefore to strengthen his argument, the vice president has to show that Panoply reduced work hours for productivity reasons.

The writer’s final and over arching claim is that fatigue and sleep deprivation is the cause of on -the- job accidents at Quiot. This claim is flawed because the correlation he draws is weak and unsupported. Other factors may be responsible for on-the-job accidents such as lack of adequate safety measures, lack of training on how to handle equipments. Also, on-the-job accidents could have increased if the company employed new staff that were unfamiliar with the processes. To bolster is recommendation the writer should show that majority of the accidents that occured on the plant were a result of sleep deprivation.

The failure of the writer to provide cogent proofs for his claims makes his conclusion unwarranted. If sleep deprivation and fatigue are not the causes of on-the-job accidents, then the organization does not have to reduce shift hours.

In conclusion, the vice president has to show that holding other factors (similarity between the companies, reason for reduced work hours in Panoply and exact causes of accidents at Quiot) sleep deprivation and fatigue are the causes on the job-accidents.