| |
|
 |
相关文章 |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
GRE·94-4考题——（2）(1) |
|
|
| GRE·94-4考题——（2）(1) |
|
作者：佚名 文章来源：不详更新时间：2006-5-30 12:36:55  |
|
Defenders of special protective labor
legislation for women often maintain
that eliminating such laws would
destroy the fruits of a century-long
(5) struggle for the protection of women
workers. Even a brief examination of
the historic practice of courts and
employers would show that the fruit
of such laws has been bitter: they
(10) are , in practice, more of a curse
than a blessing.
Sex-defined protective laws have
often been based on stereotypical
assumptions concerning women's needs
(15) and abilities, and employers have
frequently used them as legal excuses
for discriminating against women.
After the Second World War, for
example, businesses and government
(20) sought to persuade women to vacate
jobs in factories, thus making room
in the labor force for returning
veterans. The revival or passage of
state laws limiting the daily or weekly
(25) work hours of women conveniently
accomplished this. Employers had only
to declare that overtime hours were
a necessary condition of employment
or promotion in their factory, and
(30) women could be quite legally fired,
refused jobs, or kept at low wage
levels, all in the name of "protecting"
their health. By validating such laws
when they are challenged by lawsuits,
(35) the courts have colluded over the years
in establishing different, less advant-
ageous employment terms for women
than for men, thus reducing women's
competitiveness on the job market.
(40) At the same time, even the most well-
intentioned lawmakers, courts, and
employers have often been blind to
the real needs of women. The lawmakers
and the courts continue to permit
(45) employers to offer employee health
insurance plans that cover all known
human medical disabilities except
those relating to pregnancy and
childbirth.
(50) Finally, labor laws protecting only
special groups are often ineffective
at protecting the workers who are
actually in the workplace. Some
chemicals, for example, pose repro-
(55) ductive risks for women of child-
bearing years; manufacturers using
the chemicals comply with laws
protecting women against these
hazards by refusing to hire them.
(60) Thus the sex-defined legislation
protects the
共8页: 1 [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 下一页
hypothetical female
worker, but has no effect whatever
on the safety of any actual employee.
The health risks to male employees in
(65) such industries cannot be negligible,
since chemicals toxic enough to cause
birth defects in fetuses or sterility
in women are presumably harmful to the
human metabolism. Protective laws
(70) aimed at changing production materials
or techniques in order to reduce such
hazards would benefit all employees
without discriminating against any.
In sum, protective labor laws for
(75) women are discriminatory and do not
meet their intended purpose. Legislators
should recognize that women are in the
work force to stay, and that their
needs-good health care, a decent wage,
(80) and a safe workplace-are the needs of
all workers, Laws that ignore these
facts violate women's rights for equal
protection in employment.
According to the author, which
of the following resulted from the
passage or revival of state laws
limiting the work hours of women
workers?
Women workers were compelled to
leave their jobs in factories.
Many employers had difficulty in
providing jobs for returning veterans.
Many employers found it hard to
attract women workers.
The health of most women factory
workers improved.
Employment practices that addressed
the real needs of women workers became
common.!
————————————————————————
答案：(A)
妇女特别保护劳工法的辩护者经常坚持这样一种观点，即废除这样的法律就会
摧毁一个世纪之久的争取女性工人保护的成果。即使对法庭和雇主历史上的惯例作
一种简短的考察，也能证明这类法律的后果是苦涩的：它们在实践中更多地是灾祸，
而非幸事。
以性别为划分界线的保护法通常是以有关妇女的需要和能力的陈腐见解为基
础，而雇主们则常常将它们用作歧视妇女的法律借口。例如，在第二次世界大战之
后，工商企业和政府部门力图劝说妇女退出工厂的工作岗位，从而为归来的退伍军
人在劳动力市场腾出空位来。限制女工日劳动时间或周劳动时间的州一级法律的恢
复或通过，轻而易举地实现这一目标。雇主们所需要做的，只是去宣布超时加班是
他们工厂中受雇佣和受晋升的一个必要条件，这样妇女就被非常合理合法地解雇，
被拒绝分配给工作，或者一直被保持在低廉的工资水准上，而所有这一切均打着“保
护”她们身体健康的名义。当受到法律诉论的挑战时，法庭通过确认这类法律的有
效性，在过去几年中与雇主同流合污，建立起男女有别的、对妇女更为不利的雇佣
条件，从而减弱了妇女在就职市场上的竞争力。同时，即使是最善意的立法者、法
庭和雇主也经常是对妇女的真正需要熟视而睹。立法者和法庭继续允许雇主提供雇
员健康保险计划，这些计划涵盖所有已知的人类医疗伤残，却唯独不包括那些与妊
娠和生育相关的医疗伤残。
最后，仅保护特殊群体的劳工法，在保护那些身在实际工作单位的工人时，常
显得无效。例如，有些化学品对育龄妇女构成生育危险；使用这些化学品的制造商
们为了遵守法律，保护妇女避免这类风险，因而拒不雇佣她们。因此，以性别为划
分界线的立法所保护仅是那种假设臆想中的女性工人，但对任何实际情形中的雇员
不具有任何效用。在这些行业中，对男性雇员构成的健康危险不可能是微乎其微、
无足轻重的，因为足以导致胎儿生育缺陷或妇女不育症的有毒化学物质据推测也会
对人类新陈代谢构成危害。旨在改变生产材料或工蕊以便减少此类危险的保护法可
望
共8页: 上一页 [1] 2 [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 下一页
给所有雇员带来福音，而不会对任何一类雇员有任何歧视。
概而言之，面向妇女的保护劳工法是歧视性的，且也不能满足它们预期的目标。
立法者理应认识到，妇女将会一直存在于劳动力大军中，并且她们的需求——良好
的保健、体面的工资收入、以及安全的工作环境——代表着所有工人的需求，无视
这些事实的法律违背了妇女享受平等就业保护的权利。
The author places the word "Pro-
tecting" in quotation marks in line
32 most likely in order to suggest
that
she is quoting the actual wording
of the laws in question
the protective nature of the laws
in question should not be overlooked
protecting, the health of workers
is important to those who support pro-
tective labor laws
the laws in question were really
used to the detriment of women workers,
despite being overtly protective in
intent
the health of workers is not in
need of protection, even in jobs
where many hours of overtime work,
are required!
————————————————————————
答案：(D)
妇女特别保护劳工法的辩护者经常坚持这样一种观点，即废除这样的法律就会
摧毁一个世纪之久的争取女性工人保护的成果。即使对法庭和雇主历史上的惯例作
一种简短的考察，也能证明这类法律的后果是苦涩的：它们在实践中更多地是灾祸，
而非幸事。
以性别为划分界线的保护法通常是以有关妇女的需要和能力的陈腐见解为基
础，而雇主们则常常将它们用作歧视妇女的法律借口。例如，在第二次世界大战之
后，工商企业和政府部门力图劝说妇女退出工厂的工作岗位，从而为归来的退伍军
人在劳动力市场腾出空位来。限制女工日劳动时间或周劳动时间的州一级法律的恢
复或通过，轻而易举地实现这一目标。雇主们所需要做的，只是去宣布超时加班是
他们工厂中受雇佣和受晋升的一个必要条件，这样妇女就被非常合理合法地解雇，
被拒绝分配给工作，或者一直被保持在低廉的工资水准上，而所有这一切均打着“保
护”她们身体健康的名义。当受到法律诉论的挑战时，法庭通过确认这类法律的有
效性，在过去几年中与雇主同流合污，建立起男女有别的、对妇女更为不利的雇佣
条件，从而减弱了妇女在就职市场上的竞争力。同时，即使是最善意的立法者、法
庭和雇主也经常是对妇女的真正需要熟视而睹。立法者和法庭继续允许雇主提供雇
员健康保险计划，这些计划涵盖所有已知的人类医疗伤残，却唯独不包括那些与妊
娠和生育相关的医疗伤残。
最后，仅保护特殊群体的劳工法，在保护那些身在实际工作单位的工人时，常
显得无效。例如，有些化学品对育龄妇女构成生育危险；使用这些化学品的制造商
们为了遵守法律，保护妇女避免这类风险，因而拒不雇佣她们。因此，以性别为划
分界线的立法所保护仅是那种假设臆想中的女性工人，但对任何实际情形中的雇员
不具有任何效用。在这些行业中，对男性雇员构成的健康危险不可能是微乎其微、
无足轻重的，因为足以导致胎儿生育缺陷或妇女不育症的有毒化学物质据推测也会
对人类新陈代谢构成危害。旨在改变生产材料或工蕊以便减少此类危险的保护法可
望给所有雇员带来福音，而不会对任何一类雇员有任何歧视。
概而言之，面向妇女的保护劳工法是歧视性的，且也不能满足它们预期的目标。
立法者理应认识到，妇女将会一直存在于劳动力大军中，并且她们的需求——良好
的保健、体面的工资收入、以及安全的工作环境——代表着所有工人的需求，无视
这些事实的法律违背了妇女享受平等就业保护的权利。
The passage suggests that which
of the following is a shortcoming of
protective labor laws that single out
a particular group of workers for
protection?
Such laws are often too weak to
be effective at protecting the group
in question.
Such laws are usually drafted by
legislators who, do not have the best
interests of workers at heart.
Such laws exert no pressure on
employers to eliminate hazards in
the workplace.
Compliance with
共8页: 上一页 [1] [2] 3 [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 下一页
such laws is
often costly for employers and
provokes lawsuits by employees
claiming discrimination.
Employer compliance with such
laws results in increased tension
among workers on the job, because
such laws unfairly privilege one
group of employees over another.!
————————————————————————
答案：(C)
妇女特别保护劳工法的辩护者经常坚持这样一种观点，即废除这样的法律就会
摧毁一个世纪之久的争取女性工人保护的成果。即使对法庭和雇主历史上的惯例作
一种简短的考察，也能证明这类法律的后果是苦涩的：它们在实践中更多地是灾祸，
而非幸事。
以性别为划分界线的保护法通常是以有关妇女的需要和能力的陈腐见解为基
础，而雇主们则常常将它们用作歧视妇女的法律借口。例如，在第二次世界大战之
后，工商企业和政府部门力图劝说妇女退出工厂的工作岗位，从而为归来的退伍军
人在劳动力市场腾出空位来。限制女工日劳动时间或周劳动时间的州一级法律的恢
复或通过，轻而易举地实现这一目标。雇主们所需要做的，只是去宣布超时加班是
他们工厂中受雇佣和受晋升的一个必要条件，这样妇女就被非常合理合法地解雇，
被拒绝分配给工作，或者一直被保持在低廉的工资水准上，而所有这一切均打着“保
护”她们身体健康的名义。当受到法律诉论的挑战时，法庭通过确认这类法律的有
效性，在过去几年中与雇主同流合污，建立起男女有别的、对妇女更为不利的雇佣
条件，从而减弱了妇女在就职市场上的竞争力。同时，即使是最善意的立法者、法
庭和雇主也经常是对妇女的真正需要熟视而睹。立法者和法庭继续允许雇主提供雇
员健康保险计划，这些计划涵盖所有已知的人类医疗伤残，却唯独不包括那些与妊
娠和生育相关的医疗伤残。
最后，仅保护特殊群体的劳工法，在保护那些身在实际工作单位的工人时，常
显得无效。例如，有些化学品对育龄妇女构成生育危险；使用这些化学品的制造商
们为了遵守法律，保护妇女避免这类风险，因而拒不雇佣她们。因此，以性别为划
分界线的立法所保护仅是那种假设臆想中的女性工人，但对任何实际情形中的雇员
不具有任何效用。在这些行业中，对男性雇员构成的健康危险不可能是微乎其微、
无足轻重的，因为足以导致胎儿生育缺陷或妇女不育症的有毒化学物质据推测也会
对人类新陈代谢构成危害。旨在改变生产材料或工蕊以便减少此类危险的保护法可
望给所有雇员带来福音，而不会对任何一类雇员有任何歧视。
概而言之，面向妇女的保护劳工法是歧视性的，且也不能满足它们预期的目标。
立法者理应认识到，妇女将会一直存在于劳动力大军中，并且她们的需求——良好
的保健、体面的工资收入、以及安全的工作环境——代表着所有工人的需求，无视
这些事实的法律违背了妇女享受平等就业保护的权利。
According to the first paragraph
of the passage, the author considers
which of the following to be most
helpful in determining the value of
special protective labor legislation
for women?
A comparative study of patterns
of work-related illnesses in states
that had such laws and in states that
did not
An estimate of how many women
workers are in favor of such laws
An analysis of the cost to
employers of complying with such laws
A consideration of what intentions
the advocates of such laws really, had
concerning women workers.
An examination of the actual
effects that such laws have had
in the past on women workers[1] [2] 下一页
|
|
| 文章录入：admin 责任编辑：admin |
| |
|
上一篇文章： GRE题型及成绩标准
下一篇文章： 4月10号GRE单题总结（2）(1) |
|
|
| 【字体：小 大】【发表评论】【加入收藏】【告诉好友】【打印此文】【关闭窗口】 |
|
|
|
|
|
