Q15 - Midlevel managers at large

[demetri.blaisdell]

This problem looks like a strengthen EXCEPT question but it hasn't got an argument core. You can either think of it as a quirky strengthen question or an inference question.

Statement: midlevel bosses don't suggest getting rid of people even when they are overstaffed.

4 answers will suggest reasons why they don't want to fire anybody. The correct answer will give a reason why they would want to fire people.

(E) gives managers an easy way out. Early retirement is a lot better way of getting rid of people than by firing them. If managers had this easy option, it seems like they would fire more people... not less.

(A) helps explain why there's no firing. Managers get more money if they manage more employees. Obviously they don't want to fire people if they get a pay cut.

(B) also helps explain the lack of firing. Managers are lazy and they will get to work less if they don't fire anybody.

(C) is a more generous reason why managers don't want to fire people: team morale will suffer.

(D) is also nicer to the managers. The amount of work is unpredictable so managers don't want to fire people today and find they are understaffed tomorrow.

If you've still got questions after reading this, post away!

Demetri

[Acing LSAT]

I know that E is better I had one problem with D. The stem says MLM wont reduce staff even when the are obviously[i][/i] overstaffed.

D makes a case that it is always hand to have extra people around.
so then we are not talking about being "overstaffed"

why I am wrong?

[nicholasasquith]

D is a little presumptuous, it requires us to assume higher workloads need more staff.

If you can make that leap, then its easy to see a manager wouldn't want to reduce his staff. Even if he was overstaffed, he might need those extra people if his workload suddenly increases.

[demetri.blaisdell]

Thanks for posting, both of you. Great explanation. I think the key to focus on is that they may be obviously overstaffed now but the workload could shift and all of a sudden they would be understaffed.

It's true that you have to assume that more work requires more employees. But, to be honest, that seems like a pretty reasonable assumption to make. Especially because this only requires us to strengthen (it's not a sufficient assumption except question).

Thanks again for posting!

Demetri