- UID
- 1407782
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2019-6-30
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
Hi 大家好,閱讀打卡訓練第25天。
舊題複習, 複習打卡訓練D13天的部分。
https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-1387352-1-1.html
According to many analysts, labor-management relations in the United States are undergoing a fundamental change: traditional adversarialism is giving way to a new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor. These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands: the need for wage restraint and reduced benefits as well as the abolition of “rigid” work rules, seniority rights, and job classifications.
Sophisticated proponents of these new developments cast their observations in a prolabor light. In return for their concessions, they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing, retraining rights, and job¬-security guarantees. Unions can also trade concessions for more say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work-life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions may even win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management.
Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway. Companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives, opponents point out, and labor costs are usually just a small factor in the equation. Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions.
Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century. They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward. If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the US social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further,they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a company's problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels—a competition they cannot win.
主架構<A> the trend of the labor relations is changing . ( traditional adversarialism is giving way to a new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor.)
- <A-1> the reason behind the change of trend and some details of the change.
(These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands : the need for wage restraint and reduced benefits as well as the abolition of “rigid” work rules, seniority rights, and job classifications.) - <A-2> Views of proponents of this change. ( Sophisticated proponents of these new developments cast their observations in a prolabor light.) that the heavy enamel of australopithecine teeth is an adaptation to bone crunching, since both seed cracking and bone crunching produce distinctive micro-wear characteristics on teeth.)
- <A-2-1> Reason to support/favor the change - in terns of cooperative relationship - profit sharing. ( In return for their concessions , they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing , retraining rights, and job¬-security guarantees)
- <A-2-2> Reason to support/favor the change - say on shop floor and pariticipation in pricing strategy, plant location.. etc. (Unions can also trade concessions formore say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work-life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions mayeven win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management)
- <A-3> Views of opponents of this change. (Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway.)
- <A-3-1> Reason to oppose the change - companies always place them in the frist place. (Companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives, opponents point out, and labor costs are usually just a small factor in the equation.)
- <A-3-2> Reason to oppose the change - concessions actually play no role. (Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions.)
- <A-3-3> Reason to oppose the change - underlay success of US. Wage-related concessions. (Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century.)
- <A-3-3-1> Detailed explanation of why wage-related concessions are highly opposed.- purchasing power. (They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward.)
- <A-3-3-2> Detailed explanation of why wage-related concessions are highly opposed. - becoming a less developed country and competing with 3rd world pay. (If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the US social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further,they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a company's problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels—a competition they cannot win.)
1. It can be inferred from the passage that opponents of labor concessions would most likely describe many plant-relocation decisions made by United States companies as
2. It can be inferred from the passage that, until recently, which of the following has been true of United States industry in the twentieth century?
- Union workers have been paid relatively high wages <A-3-3>
3. The passage provides information to answer which of the following questions?
- What has caused unions to consider wage restraints and reduced benefits? <A-1>
4. The passage is primarily concerned with the
- consequences of labor concessions to management <A-2 proponent versus A-3 opponent and the results of two.>
5. The sentence “If proposals for pay cuts … unskilled laborers” serves primarily to
- present a hypothesis <A-3-3-2>
6. It can be inferred from the passage that opponents of labor concessions believe that if concession bargaining continues, then
- the social structure of the United States will be negatively affected <A-3-3-2>
7. According to the author, “Sophisticated proponents” of concessions do which of the following?
Emphasize the benefits unions can gain by granting concessions. <A-2>
以上分析,還請有想法的大大們不吝分享。謝謝。
|
|