Seniority (years of service) should not be the basis of employee compensation. Employees should be promoted and given raises solely on the basis of their work performance and merit. That is a better way to encourage high productivity.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.
The author is of the opinion that work performance and merit should be thee deciding factor in whether one should get promotion and not seniority. I agree with the author's opinion in so far that, one's work should be judged on the quality of the work as well, not simply on the basis of the employee's experience. However, the level of promotion and the employee's experience do matter in the situations where promotion is considered.
Surely, whenever an employee is working assiduously and producing desired results, he/she should be appreciated, as it will keep boosting them and will enhance the productivity. However, it won't be fair of the organization to simply promote everybody who has done efficiently well in their work. So, various other factors need to be taken into consideration, on of which includes the years of service the employee has given to the said organization.
For example, if two people were up for promotion in the organization, and both of them have done really well on their previous given task, then it would be difficult to decide between them. So, the seniority would come into the picture. If one of the two employees has been with the organization for many years more than the other employee, surely he would be given preference based on his history, provided that his track record is up to the mark. However, if one had only the years, and other had the merit, the person with the merit would come out standing.
Admittedly, if seniority is only considered to be the factor in deciding promotion, then many people would argue that there is no point in doing a job well and we simply would have to stay in one company. However, if the person is lacking in giving the desired results, then he won't be with the organization for long( assuming he is fired for not performing well in his job continuously), and so he would have to start from the very beginning again. This whole process could go on, and to no means of an end.
So, I agree that a persons productive output and his merit should be considered when considering the promotion, however we simply cannot ignore seniority as the person becomes a senior in an organization only by staying with the organization by working well within the organization.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-24 | Sruthi Bheemineni | 50 | view |
| 2019-08-24 | Shrija Sheth | 83 | view |
| 2019-06-19 | fresky | 40 | view |
| 2019-03-18 | Rakshick Shrinivas | 50 | view |
| 2019-01-07 | abyz123 | 58 | view |
- The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your p 66
- Seniority (years of service) should not be the basis of employee compensation. Employees should be promoted and given raises solely on the basis of their work performance and merit. That is a better way to encourage high productivity.Discuss the extent to 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 165, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ion and not seniority. I agree with the authors opinion in so far that, ones work shoul...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 18, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a person' or simply 'persons'?
Suggestion: a person; persons
...no means of an end. So, I agree that a persons productive output and his merit should ...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['however', 'if', 'really', 'so', 'then', 'well', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.183720930233 0.240241500013 76% => OK
Verbs: 0.181395348837 0.157235817809 115% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0348837209302 0.0880659088768 40% => Some adjectives wanted.
Adverbs: 0.102325581395 0.0497285424764 206% => Less adverbs wanted.
Pronouns: 0.046511627907 0.0444667217837 105% => OK
Prepositions: 0.137209302326 0.12292977631 112% => OK
Participles: 0.0674418604651 0.0406280797675 166% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.74390015221 2.79330140395 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0209302325581 0.030933414821 68% => OK
Particles: 0.00232558139535 0.0016655270985 140% => OK
Determiners: 0.104651162791 0.0997080785238 105% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0372093023256 0.0249443105267 149% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0139534883721 0.0148568991511 94% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2244.0 2732.02544248 82% => OK
No of words: 389.0 452.878318584 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.76863753213 6.0361032391 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.58838876751 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.308483290488 0.366273622748 84% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.223650385604 0.280924506359 80% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.167095115681 0.200843997647 83% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.115681233933 0.132149295362 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74390015221 2.79330140395 98% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 219.290929204 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.470437017995 0.48968727796 96% => OK
Word variations: 50.0842788743 55.4138127331 90% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.6194690265 68% => OK
Sentence length: 27.7857142857 23.380412469 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.715606969 59.4972553346 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 160.285714286 141.124799967 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7857142857 23.380412469 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 0.674092028746 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 50.1507528461 51.4728631049 97% => OK
Elegance: 1.17605633803 1.64882698954 71% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.515979889683 0.391690518653 132% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.152299763156 0.123202303941 124% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0962832013334 0.077325440228 125% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.662827758119 0.547984918172 121% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.162158714461 0.149214159877 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.251867807747 0.161403998019 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0925327388338 0.0892212321368 104% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.410183574053 0.385218514788 106% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0656717629154 0.0692045440612 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.354340392051 0.275328986314 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108653357426 0.0653680567796 166% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.4325221239 77% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.30420353982 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88274336283 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 7.22455752212 97% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.66592920354 109% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 13.5995575221 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.