Self-study
Arbitrator: The shipping manager admits that he decided to close the old facility on October 14 and to schedule the new facility's opening for October 17, the following Monday. ███ ██ ████ ██████ ████ ██ ██ ███ ███████████ ███ ███ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ███ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ██ ██████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ████████████ ███████ ██████ ███ ██████ ████ ███████ ███ ████ ████████████
Summary
The shipping manager claims that he is not responsible for the facility opening late, because the contractor didn’t finish on time. He is to blame, however, because he knew the contractor typically gets delayed and should have planned for that possibility.
Notable Assumptions
The argument moves from the fact that the shipping manager was aware of the contractor’s delay to the fact that he was to blame for not planning accordingly. It doesn’t explicitly state, however, why he had a responsibility to prepare for somebody else’s failings. We’re looking for some principle that justifies the fact that the manager ought to have done something to prepare for the contractor’s delay, and is therefore to blame for not doing so.
19.
Which one of the following ██████████ █████████ ███ ████████████ █████████
a
A manager should ████ ███████████ ████████ ████ ███████ ████ ██████ ██████████
This explains why the manager is to blame - he should have taken the delay into account, and because he didn’t, the lost business was partially his fault.
b
A manager should ██ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██ ██ █████ ████ █████████
Leads to the wrong conclusion. If this were the case, then it wouldn’t be the manager’s fault, as he should have been able to depend on the contractors to finish on time.
c
A manager should ███ ██ ██ ████ ███████████ ██ █████ ████ █████████
This doesn’t reflect the arbitrator’s reason for blaming the manager. The arbitrator assigns blame because the manager failed to plan for the delay, not because the manager failed to prevent the delay. The arbitrator doesn’t suggest that the manager should have done anything to make the contractors work faster.
d
A manager should ██ ████ ███████████ ███ ████████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ███████ ████████ ███████████
The premises don’t trigger this principle for two reasons. First, nothing suggests the shipping manager was directly supervising the contractors. Second, this principle is about blaming managers for other people’s mistakes. But is a delay considered a “mistake”? It’s unclear.
e
A manager, and ████ █ ████████ ██████ ██ ████ ███████████ ███ █ █████████ ████████
Two problems. First, this says that all blame should be put on the manager. But the arbitrator argues that both the manager and the contractor share blame. Second, this principle is triggered by a project’s failure. But the project in the stimulus didn’t fail—it just suffered a costly delay.