Integrated Essay about employees working four times a week

Fundamentally, the passage and the lecture both discourse about a mandatory policy requiring companies to offer their employees the option of working a four-day workweek. Primarily, the article revolves around the positive sides of a 4-day workweek and suggests the appropriate arguments. The lecturer on the other side provides three relevant counterarguments as, to why none of these are beneficial for both parties, the company, and employees. First of all, the lecturer casts doubt on and rebuts the idea of the increased profit and represents that It would force the companies to spend more, hence the hiring the new employees would cost additional fees associated with the training of the new workers, along with unaffected medical benefits and more required office space, in addition with gadgets. Therefore, the lecturer is not on good terms with this example, thus rationales it with an alternative argument. Secondly, the lecturer discharges and makes it clear, that 4-day shifts would not reduce the unemployment, due to the fact that it would cause employees to work overtime, additionally, it would drastically heighten the expectations of the employers and make them assume that 4-day employees could pull off the 5-day work. Thus, all of the mentioned things would lead to worrisome consequences and burden the workers, making the job unpleasant. Lastly, the lecturer dissents from the last idea constituted in the passage, and declares that it would not improve the quality, but decrease it in conjunction with declining job stability. Subsequently, causing no perspective career advancements. Moreover, the lecturer asserts that all of this would lead to economic downfall, ergo the companies plump for the employees with the 5-day workweek experience, consequently they have more experience and better skills and cites the supervision.