Business Case Argumentative Essay – English
The company in the business case believes that by lowering the amount of parental leave to the legal minimum, they will have happy, productive employees. However there are a few problems with their reasoning.

For one, they claim that the stress of choosing how much time to take off adversely affects the employee. Also, they believe that employees who spend more time at work are more loyal to the company, but offer nothing to back that claim up. Finally, they define happy and productive as “ultra-loyal, ultra-achieving”. Is this what makes everyone happy? Let’s take a look at these statements.

The company says that by relieving the employee of the decision of how much time to take off, they will relieve stress that could adversely affect the employee, both at home and at the office. Is making this decision really so burdensome? I don’t believe so, especially when compared to the stress of having a new baby at home. One would think this would be the least of the employee’s worries! Also, the employee may now be faced with a whole new set of problems relating to not having enough time at home with the baby, such as finding child care for such a young baby, and leaving the baby all day without the mother or baby being ready. These situations could cause much more stress than the simple one of how much time to take off.

The company also claims that those employees who spend more time at the company are more loyal. Perhaps it is indeed the case that the more loyal employees spend more time at the office, but is the reverse true? They offer no proof. By taking a major life decision out of the employee’s control, the company may cause resentment and lower the workers’ loyalty. Their loyalty may also be lowered by the company lessening a benefit that had previously been granted.

Finally, the statement says at the same time that this change will create “happier and more productive” workers, but at the same time “ultra-loyal, ultra-achieving employees”. While this may indeed be the company’s idea of happy and productive, I doubt that every employee would be happiest as an ultra-achiever. Although some people do make their job the most important thing in their life, and put most of their time and energy into it- and receive most of their fulfillment from it- I don’t think the same can be said for everyone. Some people have interests outside work, such as travel or a hobby. These people will not be made happier by being forced to spend more time at work. This basic assumption is flawed. Also, it leaves out the large group of people
for which family is the most important thing in their life- the very people that this decision will negatively affect. These people will not be made happier by being an ultra-achieving employee; they would be made happier by having more time home with their children.

So one can see the company’s statement is making a lot of assumptions that are not being backed up- is the decision of how much time to take off for parental leave really adding that much stress to workers’ lives? Are people who are forced to spend more time at work really going to be more loyal to the company? And will this decision really make these “ultra-achieving” employees happy? I don’t believe the company has made a good case for itself.