You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Business organisations should hire employees for their entire lives.
Do you agree or disagree?
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
You should write at least 250 words.
Model Answer 1:
I would have to completely disagree with the statement above. In the following paragraphs, I will outline the basic concepts of my position.
First of all, I will least the major disadvantages for employers. In today’s market, a company must be very flexible in order to compete with other firms. So, imagine the situation when a company can not fire its employees to stay on the market. It will lead to loose not only profits but the clients, market share and competitive ability also. Now, imagine the situation when a company is growing fast, everything is good and the next few years are going to be excellent. So, employers need more people to extend the production. However, nobody can tell what will happen in a few years. In this case, employers will be afraid to hire new people and extend their business because they will not be able to fire them if something goes wrong. Another important aspect of this is that a company can not have the best employees. It can not hire the better one without dismissing another employee.
What kind of disadvantages will have an employee in exchange for this kind of job security? First of all, it will be very difficult to find a job if one is not the best because an employer does not want to spend money on one’s education. Besides, an employer will not have a chance to fire one if he does not do his job well. Secondly, employees with this kind of security tend not to perfect themselves because after they are hired they can not lose their job.
In conclusion, I would like to add that this statement has some positive aspects too such as constancy, a strong spirit of the company, etc. This system takes place in Japan and some companies succeeded in it. But I think that the reason of it subsists in the Japanese traditions, the particular cultural features, habits and customs. However, in today’s market, here in the United States, a company can not afford to hire employees for their entire life.
(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is just one example out of many possible answers.)
Model Answer 2:
The issue whether the business organisations should hire employees for their entire life or not is a widely debated issue. It’s quite a debatable topic as it has both positive and negative impacts on organisations as well as people working in those organisations.
To look at the positive side, hiring people for entire life earns their loyalty to an organisation which is an important attribute any company look forward to in its employees. Employees feel much more confident while working as they are not insecure about their job and future. This also creates a high level of Job satisfaction among employees. Loyalty and satisfied employees are any organisation’s biggest strength and help the company succeed and reach a new height. As employee foresee their future with the company, they see their growth in the organisation’s growth. So they work with full passion to achieve company goals eyeing their growth as part of the organisation.
But hiring people for the lifetime will have some negative impacts also on organisations. As employees know they have been hired for the lifetime, they tend to take their jobs for granted and this ultimately reduces their productivity. When people work in the same place they tend to loose passion and zeal to work. Although it makes them comfortable with their work and they generate outputs currently but they will not feel passionate about their work in the long run. Also in such cases, it’s difficult to get any innovations done by the employees. These are not good signs for any organisation’s growth
Looking at both positive and negative sides, I feel organisation should hire for a long term to make employees feel secure and productive. As part of appreciation for productive and effective employees, an organisation can make them employed for a lifetime. This will set a good example for all employees.
( by – Ridhima Ralhan)
Model Answer 3:
Companies tend to hire people for the completion of tasks of various natures. Some tasks demand only short-time commitment and others continues in a long run. Some people argue that people will work with lofty ambitions, high dedication and a great commitment if they are hired for their lifetime. However, others claim that it is unfair for those people who are studying in different educational institutions and hoping a bright future ahead, I believe that a job for the entire life is not a pragmatic approach and creates many problems in a society.
It is often seen that businesses thrive by applying innovative ideas and modern technologies. These are two areas where students have been taught in deeply to cope up with challenges in their future. Therefore, it is mandatory for businesses to take fresh graduates and discard people in a company who lack behind in skills and knowledge. Furthermore, the unemployment rate will dramatically increase in the absence of jobs in the market. Because all jobs are occupied for lives and there are less likely to have chances of vacant places.
However, there is no doubt that people performances are extraordinary if they have confined feeling of job security. They would like to work hard to achieve maximum benefits for a company. Thus, their efforts will reflect in increased productivity and profit margin of the business.
To sum up, I would like to say that hiring employees for the lifetime is not a practical strategy in a business. Companies use people for the sake of their own benefits and reward them until there is a need for that skill in the company. Moreover, unemployment, frustration and tension are few factors which could greatly influence youngsters if businesses adopt this policy.
( by – Fahad Sultan)