PrepTest 118, Section 4, Question 25
Sarah: Our regulations for staff review are vague(45 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(12 more words not shown)
- APerformance that falls(11 more words not shown)
- BInterpreting regulations is(7 more words not shown)
- CA vague regulation(13 more words not shown)
- DA vague regulation(12 more words not shown)
- EEmployees usually consider(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What counts as unsatisfactory performance? Missing assigned work? Ignoring important messages from a supervisor? If a regulation threatens dismissal without saying what the standard means, employees won't know where they stand.
I can see why Sarah is worried. A vague rule leaves room for disagreement about whether someone has done the job well enough. But her concern goes further: someone might be fired merely for having personal views that conflict with a supervisor's. That is different from failing to do the work.
What we’re looking for
We're asked for a generalization that strengthens Sarah's reasoning. I don't have a precise rule in mind yet. I'd look for something that helps explain how this vague performance standard could produce the unfair result she fears, rather than just another statement that vague rules are undesirable.
Working the answers
- A
This describes the penalty for performance somewhat below expectations. Sarah's concern is that the standard itself is undefined and could be applied to a personal disagreement. A doesn't establish how that misuse could happen. A supervisor might still have to decide whether someone's performance falls slightly below expectations or is bad enough for dismissal.
- BCorrect
The supervisors alone get to interpret the regulations. Now we can connect the vague standard to Sarah's specific concern: the person who disagrees with an employee's views also has the authority to decide what counts as unsatisfactory performance.
Without that link, someone else might make the decision. Perhaps coworkers review performance, or an independent group interprets the rule. We hadn't established that the supervisor's personal disagreement could control the outcome. B supplies the authority that makes the feared misuse more plausible.
It doesn't show that every supervisor will abuse the rule. Sarah only says that some employees may be dismissed for this reason, and B helps explain how that could happen.
- C
Making employees answer for their performance isn't the troubling part of Sarah's argument. A rule could do that fairly by assessing whether they complete their duties. We need support for the concern about dismissing someone over personal views, not just a statement that vague rules can be used in reviews.
- D
Keeping employees in subordinate positions is not the same as dismissing them for disagreeing with supervisors. D might describe another way vague rules can be used, but it doesn't connect this company's performance standard with the particular outcome Sarah predicts.
- E
Employees' opinions about fairness don't establish how the rules will be interpreted or why disagreement with a supervisor could lead to dismissal. Employees could prefer more specific rules even if the vague ones were applied fairly. E doesn't strengthen the reasoning about the actual risk.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.