Some employers offer their employees subsidised membership of gyms and sports clubs, believing that this will make their staff healthier abd thus more effective at work. Other employers see no benefit in doing so.
Consider the arguments from both aspects of this possible debate, and reach a conclusion.
Employers are always seeking ways to enhance their employees' productivity, and subsidising healthy pursuits may be one way of achieving this. There are arguments on both sides, however, which we will discuss here.
On the one hand, it might be said that if workers are fitter and less stressed, their working time will be more efficient, leading to higher levels of output and service. Furthermore, the work/life balance of the staff will hopefully be improved, because their leisure time will be more fulfilling. This may even be more motivating than pay increments, perks, or financial rewards such as bonuses or incentives which may be hard to attain. Finally, feeling healthier may lead to better job satisfaction which is in itself a motivating factor.
Conversaly, the problem with such leisure-based subsides is that their efficacy is virtually impossible to quantity. For instance, with target-related payments, employers can at least see whether the objectives are reached or not. It might also be said that, if this budget was spent on (for example) on the job training or day release programmes, the employees would achieve better career progression and have better job prospects. These matters are all easier to measure, especially in performance reviews and appraisals, and may even help to reduce the risk of redundacy if the company restructures, downsizes or outsources its workforce.
Overall, it seems that, while healt-related subsides are superficially alternative attractive, the lack of measurability is a substancial drawback. Spending funds on ongoing training would appear to be a better use of company or Human Resources budgets.
- Some employers offer their employees subsidised membership of gyms and sports clubs believing that this will make their staff healthier abd thus more effective at work Other employers see no benefit in doing so Consider the arguments from both aspects of 76
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 25
- The tables below give information about sales of Fairtrade-labelled coffee and bananas in 1999 and 2004 in five European countries.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features,and make comparisons where relevant. 61
- In some countries the average weight of people is increasing and their levels of health and fitness are decreasing.What do you think are the causes of these problems and what measures could be taken to solve them? 11
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, furthermore, however, if, may, so, while, at least, for example, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 41.998997996 57% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1404.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 259.0 315.596192385 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42084942085 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05968417294 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.633204633205 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 429.3 506.74238477 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.5345263656 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.0 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5833333333 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.41666666667 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163394092779 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0589983467677 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0517420634206 0.0667982634062 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0956046116624 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0662524580506 0.056905535591 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.16 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.