LSAT 129 – Section 1 – Question 08

LSAT 129 - Section 1 - Question 08

June 2009

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:21

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT129 S1 Q08
+LR
+Exp
Resolve reconcile or explain +RRE
Net Effect +NetEff
A
92%
163
B
1%
154
C
1%
151
D
6%
154
E
1%
147
133
141
149
 +Easier 146.023 +SubsectionMedium

When companies’ profits would otherwise be reduced by an increase in the minimum wage (a wage rate set by the government as the lowest that companies are allowed to pay), the companies often reduce the number of workers they employ. Yet a recent increase in the minimum wage did not result in job cutbacks in the fast-food industry, where most workers are paid the minimum wage.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Minimum-wage increases usually result in layoffs, yet the fast-food industry didn’t experience layoffs after a recent minimum-wage increase.

Objective
The right answer will be a hypothesis explaining why the fast-food industry didn’t react as industries generally do to a minimum-wage increase, especially considering that most fast-food industry employees are paid the minimum wage. The explanation must account for the lack of cutbacks.

A
After the recent increase in the minimum wage, decreased job turnover in the fast-food industry allowed employers of fast-food workers to save enough on recruiting costs to cover the cost of the wage increase.
Since fast-food workers got a raise, they didn’t go looking for new jobs. Employers were therefore able to save on recruiting new workers. This saving allowed them to continue operating as usual without cutbacks.
B
If, in any industry, an increase in the minimum wage leads to the elimination of many jobs that pay the minimum wage, then higher-paying supervisory positions will also be eliminated in that industry.
The increase in the minimum wage didn’t lead to the elimination of minimum-wage fast food jobs. Besides, it’s not like the supervisor class decides which jobs are retained or eliminated.
C
With respect to its response to increases in the minimum wage, the fast-food industry does not differ significantly from other industries that employ many workers at the minimum wage.
This directly contradicts the stimulus rather than giving the explanation we need. Companies usually cut back on jobs when the minimum wage raises, but fast-food companies didn’t cut back on jobs. The fast-food industry definitely differed from other industries.
D
A few employees in the fast-food industry were already earning more than the new, higher minimum wage before the new minimum wage was established.
We don’t care about exceptions. Most fast-food employees were at the minimum wage, so we still need to know why they weren’t laid off as expected.
E
Sales of fast food to workers who are paid the minimum wage did not increase following the recent change in the minimum wage.
We’re not talking about workers actually buying fast food. We’re talking about fast-food workers.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 129 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply