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 profits. For the country as a whole, one of the primary benefits of offering this option to employees is that it would reduce unemployment rates. 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
The writer mentions in the reading the advantages of less wages due to decreased work time within a week. He claims that the new plan will support businesses by increasing their income, reducing unemployment issues and, eventually, helping the workforce as their living standards increase. The speaker completely denies all of the published assumptions.
The writer mentions in the reading the advantages of less wages due to decreased work time within a week. He claims that the new plan will support businesses by increasing their income, reducing unemployment issues and, eventually, helping the workforce as their living standards increase. The speaker completely denies any of the published assumptions.
Eliminating the amount of salary wages significantly reduces the overall expense of companies by having more money. Recruitment of new hires would potentially force the company to invest more money. Those extra expenses are used to provide more office rooms, safety manacles, purchasing new machines, etc., which really cut the income.
The speaker states that it does not work the concept of developing new job positions. This is also likely that the employers would make the worker an opportunity for overwork or they might expect to get the same amount of work in a week at shortened working days. If it happens, the job will be very difficult, the issues of unemployment remain the same at the same time. So, it does not affect the economic situation.
On the ground that workers will have time to spend with their families, the author is very optimistic, and quality lives can be guaranteed. The lecturer has the opposite views entirely, he says it totally increases the likelihood of losing their employment, living conditions will get worse. For fact, the workers who will spend more time with the family have little chance of doing well on the job market. The worker doing his best in the job has caught the eyes of the companies.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 54, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun wages is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ntions in the reading the advantages of less wages due to decreased work time within...
^^^^
Line 1, column 321, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...increase. The speaker completely denies all of the published assumptions. The writer me...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 54, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun wages is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ntions in the reading the advantages of less wages due to decreased work time within...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, really, so, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1642.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1473354232 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70143782731 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.510971786834 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 502.2 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.6329321339 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.5882352941 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7647058824 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.52941176471 7.06452816374 22% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.134908152053 0.272083759551 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0447007464033 0.0996497079465 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0372199060249 0.0662205650399 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0796196398797 0.162205337803 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.034087441132 0.0443174109184 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 68.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.