TOEFL
Essay #036: Should employers offer "jobs for life"?
This essay was written by me (Erin
Billy) and has 531 words. Even though this essay
is relatively long, I wrote it in under 20 minutes.
Your essay should have 300 - 500 words.
Back to top
Estimated
TOEFL Essay score: 6.0/6.0
Back to top
There are many advantages and
disadvantages to offering employees job security for
life. In Japan, for example, prospective employees know
that their employers will provide them with job security
for their entire working days and they are better able
to plan for their future and family. However, many businesses
are now realizing that their employees have less motivation
to work and this leads to less profits for the company.
I will describe the advantages and disadvantages of
this system in this essay and I will show that ultimately
“jobs for life” is not good for a society.
Job security is very important
for both the employee and the employer. For the employee,
job security is important because she can depend on
her source of income and better plan her future accordingly.
For the employer, the employee represents an investment
because of the number of hours of training required
and the company will continue to have a return on this
investment. As we all know, feeling secure about where
our future income will come from is very important for
our well-being—anybody who has lost a job and has had
trouble finding a new one knows that this transition
period can cause a lot of anxiety.
However, job security tends
to lead to decreased productivity. In general, employees
who are certain that they can never lose their jobs
tend to work less efficiently, thereby contributing
to an overall reduction of productivity in the company.
A common example all over the world is that of civil
servants. In Thailand, for example, many government
workers are so indolent that it can take days or months
for something to be finished that should only take a
few days. It is not uncommon to walk into a government
office and see employees filing their nails, making
personal calls on the telephone, taking three-hour lunches,
or surfing the Internet for fun.
Finally, the model of capitalism
is proving to be the most efficient model that we have
right now. This model of job security completely contradicts
the foundations of capitalism. We can see in the United
States now that people are starting to change jobs,
even careers more and more often. Some career consultants
even recommend that employees find new jobs every three
to five years. Even in countries that still offer job
security for life, this model is showing signs of dying
out. For example, in Japan, once famous for its lifelong
jobs, both employees and employers are starting to expect
that these jobs will not last a lifetime. Many of my
Japanese friends travel back and forth between the United
States and Japan are have been able to find temporary
professional jobs while they are in Japan.
In short, I disagree that companies
should offer their employees jobs for life. We can see
this example in some parts of the world and in other
areas in the United States, but these examples are generally
regarded as outmoded ways of conducting business. Finally,
the models of capitalism, even though it may seem cruel,
the so-called “law of the jungle,” are proving to be
the most effective way to raise the standard of living
of a country.
|
