In some country, it is illegal for companies to reject job applicants. Is this positive or negative development?
In many country, companies need to care about the workers and it is will be illegal if companies reject job applicants for their age. This essay will examine about positive and negative and give opinion.
Admittedly, there are some arguments in favor of if companies don’t reject job applicants for their age. First, government subsidies for working are believed to equalize job opportunity among young adolescents regardless of their family background. This working support, presumably tends not only to increase the overall social skills enrollment rate of lower-income people but to mitigate their feeling of inferiority when they going to other workplace in the future, which promotes an egalitarian society. Second, companies can apply people for their talents not about their age would probably result in a greater supply of highly qualified workers, which benefits society in the long run. In fact, it is acknowledged that skilled and knowledgeable human capital is imperative to foster economic growth and technological development in any nations.
Nevertheless, the resultant problem would ba far more significant than the minor benefits once if companies apply people for job but they don’t enough to old, it may also become illegal under the labor laws of some countries today. First, companies don’t reject job applicants for their age would likely correspond with a tremendous financial strain on a country. Generating no income from training for young people or fees, companies could become over-reliant on the state budget for funding, meaning that there would be less input to develop other important areas such as healthcare system and transport infrastructure. Second, companies apply all people not for their age would tempt many young people including those who are not academically inclined or show no interest in working, thereby adding great burdens for staff enrollment or government and potentially wasting time that these young people could spent time for suitable studying paths. It, instead, would be a more job applicants viable option if the resources were focused on supporting less privileged yet gifted people.
In conclusion, this argument has advantages and disadvantages coexist. However, negative would be more positive if will got worse if it becomes exploitative for companies not reject job applicants for their age. So that, government need consider for development country.
- The maps show the changes made to a small museum and its surroundings in 1990 and 2010 73
- Some people think that young people should be required to do unpaid work helping people in the community Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
- Nowadays not enough students choose science subjects in university in many countries Why Effects on society 89
- The table chart show the population of New Zealand between 2011 and 2012 67
- The table below shows population figures for 4 countries for 2003 and projected figures for 2025 and 2050 Population million Countries 2003 2025 2050 Argentina 34 48 62 Indonesia 238 274 312 Italy 54 47 45 Republic of Korea 48 52 52 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 328, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'skills'' or 'skill's'?
Suggestion: skills'; skill's
...not only to increase the overall social skills enrollment rate of lower-income people ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 911, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires base form of the verb: 'spend'.
Suggestion: spend
...ting time that these young people could spent time for suitable studying paths. It, i...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 121, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires base form of the verb: 'get'.
Suggestion: get
...negative would be more positive if will got worse if it becomes exploitative for co...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2051.0 1615.20841683 127% => OK
No of words: 374.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48395721925 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83178812638 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 176.041082164 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569518716578 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 638.1 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.3599952819 49.4020404114 153% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.733333333 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9333333333 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.407309500439 0.244688304435 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148209367186 0.084324248473 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104834076618 0.0667982634062 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.293312066383 0.151304729494 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0736518418006 0.056905535591 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.6 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 78.4519038076 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: 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.