Level 5 Critical Reading Question

[Afaloo]

<p>Any help will be appreciated. This is the passage:</p>

<p>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been investigating the treatment of women in a major financial services firm since a former executive alleged that she had been underpaid, excluded from outings with clients, and denied promotion because of her gender. if the commission sues the firm, it would be a rare case of the federal government's taking up the cause of a highly compensated professional in a work place dispute. </p>

<p>The question says: It can be inferred that the commission views the alleged treatment of the former executive as: </p>

<p>(A) possibly representative of a general pattern </p>

<p>(B) clearly showing the need for legal reform</p>

<p>(C) indicative of declining business ethics </p>

<p>(D) posing a sensitive political dilemma </p>

<p>(E) likely to prove difficult to verify </p>

<p>.. Could you guys explain why the answer is (A)? explaining why the other answers are wrong would be helpful too. </p>

<p>Thanks in advance.</p>

[DinhNguyen]

<p>B) If the case ‘clearly’ shows the need for legal reform, there would be NO need for investigating. And the ‘If’ also points that the case is still uncertain.
C) ‘Business ethics’ is not stated in the passage.
D) There’s no ‘dilemma’.
E) There’s no evidence in the passage.
A) works after process of elimination. I believe all the words in A) fit, not too extreme (‘possibly’) and because the commission investigates the treatment, it sees that there may be other cases.</p>

<p>my 2 cent.</p>

[Wood5440]

<p>They were investigating the treatment of “women”. It’s plural. They thought others may have gotten the same treatment.</p>