The following appeared in the editorial section of a monthly business news magazine: "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 you find this argument. In your discussion, be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you had better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument state that it makes financial sense for employers by making the workplace safer and reducing the payroll expense thus save money. The conclusion is based on premise that as the list of physical injury at working place increase, the employee’s payroll also will increase. Furthermore, the cost to make the working environment safer is outweigh the reduced payroll expense. In addition, it is plausible to improve the working environment. Finally, most companies may agree that that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases so will wages does not necessarily mean that all the companies that have hazardous work environment agree.
First, companies need to consider whether increased labor cost justify capital expenditures to improve the working environment. It may be argued that the cost to improve the workplace may substantially higher than the additional payroll expense. For example, It does not make financial sense if company only has to pay little amount of extra salaries such as USD 100 thousand per year rather...