PrepTest 113, Section 2, Question 1
Company president: Grievance procedures should allow the grievant(45 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(16 more words not shown)
- APeople who file(10 more words not shown)
- BMany disagreements are(9 more words not shown)
- CAdversaries' positions tend(11 more words not shown)
- DRespondents tend to(11 more words not shown)
- EThe mediation process(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Mediation might make sense for coworkers arguing over what coffee to buy. A serious misconduct complaint could raise very different concerns. So my first question is whether this is an appropriate way to handle every grievance.
But the president hasn't said mediation must replace every other response. The proposal is to allow it, and the claim is that it could resolve many grievances. That's narrower than saying it will work for all of them.
The criticism of HR concerns when to start. I can picture why waiting might hurt: after weeks of arguing, both people might be more interested in defending their positions than finding a compromise. Think of how much easier it can be to discuss an agreement while two people still get along than after a bitter falling-out. That gives me a possible reason to intervene early, but the president hasn't actually supplied it.
What we’re looking for
We're asked to justify that criticism of HR. We need a reason late mediation would be relatively ineffective, not a general complaint about mediation. My prediction is that the delay lets people become less willing to compromise.
Working the answers
- A
This attacks mediation in general. If everyone filing a grievance resists listening to a mediator, that is a problem whether mediation begins early or late. The president wants to allow mediation but objects to delaying it. A doesn't explain the timing distinction at the center of that criticism.
- B
Many disputes being settled without a mediator leaves open that other disputes could benefit from one. More importantly, B doesn't compare early and late mediation. It describes successful resolutions without mediation rather than explaining why waiting would make mediation less effective.
- CCorrect
As the dispute continues, the adversaries become more firmly committed to their positions and less willing to compromise. That makes it harder for a mediator to work out an agreement later.
This is the missing timing reason. An early mediator might work with people who are still open to a compromise. By the time HR's proposed process gets to mediation, their positions may have hardened. C supports the president's criticism without claiming that mediation always works early or can never work late.
- D
This raises a possible obstacle when the respondent is a supervisor, but it doesn't show that the obstacle becomes worse later in the process. It also doesn't establish that every mediated resolution requires the supervisor to surrender to the employee. A compromise could take a different form. D doesn't give us the reason to object specifically to HR's delay.
- E
This concerns the time and money mediation costs, not whether it becomes less effective when started late. A costly process could still resolve grievances successfully, and a cheap one could fail. The president's criticism targets the timing of the intervention; E compares the overall expense of two procedures without addressing that criticism.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.