Q1 - Aisha: Vadim is going to be laid off

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Sufficient

Stimulus Breakdown:
Vadim's great, but someone has to get fired, and policy is it's the new guy. So goodbye, Vadim!

Answer Anticipation:
We know someone's getting fired. We know it's going to be the new guy. We just don't know if Vadim is the new guy. The correct answer will have to state that Vadim is the most recently hired programmer.

Correct answer:
(C)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Out of scope. The firm's policy is to fire the newest person. That's not necessarily a statement of value (they may value talent more but have this policy for other reasons). More importantly, though, this still doesn't tell us that Vadim's getting the axe.

(B) Out of scope. The policy is the policy, whether the person affected by it knows it or not. Ignorance of the law, and all that.

(C) Boom. If this is true, then Vadim is getting fired.

(D) Out of scope. The policy has to do with tenure, not skill.

(E) Out of scope. Even if it is bad policy, it's still the active policy.

Takeaway/Pattern:
It would be easy in this question to assume that Vadim is the new guy and "write that into" the argument for Aisha. When the gaps are a bit more clear, the hardest part is sometimes not thinking it's already a part of the argument!

#officialexplanation