LSAT 114 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q3

LR Question 3 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: David: Forbidding companies from hiring permanent replacements…

QUESTION TYPE: Most Strongly Supported

ARGUMENTS: David thinks that it is unfair to prevent companies from hiring permanent replacements for striking workers. The company will then have little leverage in negotiations with strikers.

Lynn thinks that the companies will still have sufficient leverage if they hired temporary replacements.

ANALYSIS: They are arguing over how much leverage is lost when companies cannot hire permanent workers.

___________

1. David might believe that the companies have some leverage but not enough.
2. Lynn doesn’t seem to think that companies should have as much leverage as possible. 
3. CORRECT. Lin thinks that companies will still have “sufficient” leverage. David thinks that they will only have “little” leverage if they can’t hire permanent workers. 
4. We don’t know. David doesn’t say how much leverage they should have and Lin doesn’t define sufficient.
5. Actually this is what David believes.