Risk of Physical Injury at the Job AWA GMAT Sample

Risk of physical injury at the job is a AWA GMAT Sample. GMAT analytical writing assessment examines the writing skills of a candidate through an essay. In this GMAT AWA essay, the candidate needs to write points that bring out the flaws and weak assumptions in the given argument. It is important for challenging and task-oriented candidates to present their answers in a well-organized and planned manner. The AWA GMAT sample essay needs to ensure that candidates are able to present their ideas efficiently. Candidates can check more GMAT AWA practice papers.

In the AWA GMAT sample essay, candidates must provide evidence and discuss their thoughts on the topic. They must use persuasive evidence of injuries on the job. In addition, candidates should try to convince the readers by describing the different facts of the scenario. Candidates, however, need to understand that writing the essay for GMAT AWA Essay requires them to follow a definite structure that would enable organised writing. The following structure for the AWA GMAT sample Essay including five important paragraphs can be considered appropriate.

Introduction: Candidates need to first explain the topic of the essay given, and clearly state how well this is reasoned. The overview of the passage needs to be discussed in the introduction by the candidates.
Paragraph 1: In this paragraph, candidates must put forward the facts stated in the passage. They can also question the validity of the passage and explain them with reasons. This paragraph should include all the key points that can be discussed in the coming paragraphs.
Paragraph 2: This paragraph needs to include the second reason for the stated opinion of the candidate. Candidates can mention the background and provide reasons why wages should increase with increase of injuries. Candidates need to mention the condition of employees. Candidates can also include examples. With the help of the example and argument, it is shown that the point of view is wrong and inconsistent.
Final paragraph: This paragraph should highlight the passage. Candidates can mention the flaws provided by the author and evidence to prove that.
Conclusion: The conclusion reminds the reader and students of the title of the article. It includes arguments and counter-arguments with examples to support and disprove the candidates' views.

Based on the structure and content of the GMAT release document, the best way is taken to explain the topic. It considers the following response strategies, appreciating positive actions and ignoring negative ones as much as possible:

Instead of analyzing an argument that criticizes the writer's statement, a characteristic feature is maintained throughout the length of the article..
The entire article gives relevance and uniqueness to the readers by providing reasons and illustrations.
Strong declarative or assertive statements are created with active language and statements of cause, reasons and effect.
The supporting statements are formatted and described well, briefed with two or three sentences and concluded the article with a strong point

Topic:

“Most companies would agree that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. Hence it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer: they could thus reduce their payroll expenses and save money.”

Discuss how well reasoned…etc.

Sample Essay:

The given statement commences in favor of the fact that physical injury at the job should directly be related to the increased salary. The increased salary,which directly affects the company expenditure. Hence, safety measures are needed to be increased and precautions are taken. However, the statement seems to be faulty as it rules out one important point. If less security allows more salary for the employees then similarly a safer environment would consequently decrease the paycheck.

In this case, neither the employee nor the employer would be satisfied as both of them are paying for their amenities unintentionally. This is because employees will get a salary deduction for working in a “safe” environment, which is just foolishness. At the same time, the enterprise will definitely have to pay for increased safety measures.

Secondly, when an accident happens at the workplace, the fault is firstly investigated. If it is the fault of the machines used at the company the concerned authorities pay for the injury of the individual. However, if the error is from the employee then little to no amount has to be paid.

In all these possibilities the main idea of increasing everyone’s salary just vanishes. Only the person who has met with an accident gets the reimbursement and it is fair enough.

Consider the example of a company where the task of Individual A is to maintain the database and Employee B has to take care of the electrical wiring. It is natural to assume that the risk of injury for B is greater than that of A. Thus, increasing the salary of both the employees would compel the establishment to spend money where it is not needed.

On the other hand, increasing the safety measures would not be beneficial for person A and it will not influence his work. In addition to this, on increasing the payout of person B there may be a conflict of interest between A and the firm regarding this untimely increment.

In this way, the opinion does not hold well for a number of cases. Directly linking the payout with increasing injury cases will question the superiority of safety. The requirements like qualifications, skills, experience, flexibility, time management, will be questioned.

In addition to this, the cases of injury are more about the awareness of the individual at the workplace rather than the company’s interest. If a person pays enough attention to work then the possibility of errors and injuries is reduced. Rather than increasing salary, industries should look to teaching the staff how to deal with the types of equipment and reduce the risk. This can easily be done during the training period.

The given argument seems to be concerned only about saving the capital of an establishment rather than saving the lives of the employees. This is obviously wrong. In conclusion, the argument contains generalizations, and states an unproven and hypothetical conclusion. A business must always prioritize lives over investments.When a person encounters an injury, his/her entire life stays at risk with the possibility that he/she might not be able to work again. Thus, building a safe environment is the duty of the enterprise, and it cannot be compromised at any cost.

Suggested GMAT AWA Essays

SHARE ON FACEBOOK SHARE ON TWITTER

Risk of Physical Injury at the Job AWA GMAT Sample

Fees Structure

Comments

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWS LETTER