GMAT GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY Exam (page: 5)
GMAT Section 3: Verbal Ability
Updated on: 24-Mar-2026

The labor market is changing yet again. Increasingly, American business is turning to interim staffing to cover a greater number of its employment vacancies. Once interim (or temporary) staffing was reserved for the lower- level positions requiring little training, such as an envelope stuffer, receptionist, day laborer, and the like. Today, however, a more highly trained professional is being sought for interim work. It is not uncommon to find computer programmers, writers, marketing professionals, CPAs, and even chief financial officers working in an interim capacity. The reasons for these changes in staffing norms are generated at both the employer and employee level. Employers are pushing the drive toward interim staffing in order to maintain maximum flexibility.
Companies can be more innovative and flexible in their planning cycles if they have the option to hire employees on an as-needed basis. Additionally, employers save money using interim staffers, as they are not required to provide health insurance to temporary workers and they are not obligated to pay severance when the job terminates. Employees, too, are pushing the trend toward interim staffing. Increasingly, professionals are seeking more flexibility in their work schedules—often in response to family obligations. No longer does the permanent 9 to 5, Monday through Friday schedule work for everyone. By working interim, employees can work when it fits their schedules. However, interim staffing is not for everyone. Organizations whose workflow requires continuity of personnel may find interim staffing an impediment to productivity. Likewise, employees who need a steady source of income or who require the health insurance and other benefits provided by permanent employers may find the unpredictability in interim work problematic.

The main purpose of this passage is to

The labor market is changing yet again. Increasingly, American business is turning to interim staffing to cover a greater number of its employment vacancies. Once interim (or temporary) staffing was reserved for the lower- level positions requiring little training, such as an envelope stuffer, receptionist, day laborer, and the like. Today, however, a more highly trained professional is being sought for interim work. It is not uncommon to find computer programmers, writers, marketing professionals, CPAs, and even chief financial officers working in an interim capacity. The reasons for these changes in staffing norms are generated at both the employer and employee level. Employers are pushing the drive toward interim staffing in order to maintain maximum flexibility.
Companies can be more innovative and flexible in their planning cycles if they have the option to hire employees on an as-needed basis. Additionally, employers save money using interim staffers, as they are not required to provide health insurance to temporary workers and they are not obligated to pay severance when the job terminates. Employees, too, are pushing the trend toward interim staffing. Increasingly, professionals are seeking more flexibility in their work schedules—often in response to family obligations. No longer does the permanent 9 to 5, Monday through Friday schedule work for everyone. By working interim, employees can work when it fits their schedules. However, interim staffing is not for everyone. Organizations whose workflow requires continuity of personnel may find interim staffing an impediment to productivity. Likewise, employees who need a steady source of income or who require the health insurance and other benefits provided by permanent employers may find the unpredictability in interim work problematic.

Given the author’s purpose, which of the following would most enhance this passage?

The labor market is changing yet again. Increasingly, American business is turning to interim staffing to cover a greater number of its employment vacancies. Once interim (or temporary) staffing was reserved for the lower- level positions requiring little training, such as an envelope stuffer, receptionist, day laborer, and the like. Today, however, a more highly trained professional is being sought for interim work. It is not uncommon to find computer programmers, writers, marketing professionals, CPAs, and even chief financial officers working in an interim capacity. The reasons for these changes in staffing norms are generated at both the employer and employee level. Employers are pushing the drive toward interim staffing in order to maintain maximum flexibility.
Companies can be more innovative and flexible in their planning cycles if they have the option to hire employees on an as-needed basis. Additionally, employers save money using interim staffers, as they are not required to provide health insurance to temporary workers and they are not obligated to pay severance when the job terminates. Employees, too, are pushing the trend toward interim staffing. Increasingly, professionals are seeking more flexibility in their work schedules—often in response to family obligations. No longer does the permanent 9 to 5, Monday through Friday schedule work for everyone. By working interim, employees can work when it fits their schedules. However, interim staffing is not for everyone. Organizations whose workflow requires continuity of personnel may find interim staffing an impediment to productivity. Likewise, employees who need a steady source of income or who require the health insurance and other benefits provided by permanent employers may find the unpredictability in interim work problematic.

From the passage, it can be inferred that

Today, children whose parents are deemed incapable of caring for them are put into foster care. These children are moved into strangers’ homes, where they are cared for until their own parents can regain custody, which may not happen for years, if it happens at all. Although it means well, the current foster care program is so poorly funded, staffed, and managed that it cannot ensure the safety and wellbeing of the children in the system. The laudable idea behind foster care is that children will fare best if placed in a family setting until they can be reunited with their parents, even if it is a family of strangers. However, while in foster care, children typically get shuffled between many different foster homes, preventing them from developing long-term, supportive relationships with their foster families. Foster care placements can also force siblings to be separated, further isolating these vulnerable children. When a child is moved to a new foster home, he or she may also have to enroll in a new school, a disruptive process that has a negative impact on the child’s education. The bureaucracy that oversees this system is overwhelmed to the point that social workers are unable to adequately screen potential foster parents and keep accurate track of the children placed in foster care. There must be a better means of caring for these children. Perhaps it is time to consider creating special group homes as a means of providing these children with stable and safe environments.
A child could live in one group home for the duration of his or her time in foster care and be supervised by a team of social workers and other lay people. Children would receive proper meals and healthcare, attend the same school, and develop relationships with others experiencing the trauma of being separated from their parents. In addition, social workers and staff would have daily access to these children, enabling them to better determine if a child has a special physical or psychological need and arrange for the necessary services. Would this approach be perfect? No, but it would solve many of the problems that plague the current system. For some, the idea of a government agency housing, clothing, and feeding needy children may sound extreme, but it only suggests that we provide these children with the same basic necessities that we give to prison inmates.

Which of the following best expresses the main idea of this passage?

Today, children whose parents are deemed incapable of caring for them are put into foster care. These children are moved into strangers’ homes, where they are cared for until their own parents can regain custody, which may not happen for years, if it happens at all. Although it means well, the current foster care program is so poorly funded, staffed, and managed that it cannot ensure the safety and wellbeing of the children in the system. The laudable idea behind foster care is that children will fare best if placed in a family setting until they can be reunited with their parents, even if it is a family of strangers. However, while in foster care, children typically get shuffled between many different foster homes, preventing them from developing long-term, supportive relationships with their foster families. Foster care placements can also force siblings to be separated, further isolating these vulnerable children. When a child is moved to a new foster home, he or she may also have to enroll in a new school, a disruptive process that has a negative impact on the child’s education. The bureaucracy that oversees this system is overwhelmed to the point that social workers are unable to adequately screen potential foster parents and keep accurate track of the children placed in foster care. There must be a better means of caring for these children. Perhaps it is time to consider creating special group homes as a means of providing these children with stable and safe environments.
A child could live in one group home for the duration of his or her time in foster care and be supervised by a team of social workers and other lay people. Children would receive proper meals and healthcare, attend the same school, and develop relationships with others experiencing the trauma of being separated from their parents. In addition, social workers and staff would have daily access to these children, enabling them to better determine if a child has a special physical or psychological need and arrange for the necessary services. Would this approach be perfect? No, but it would solve many of the problems that plague the current system. For some, the idea of a government agency housing, clothing, and feeding needy children may sound extreme, but it only suggests that we provide these children with the same basic necessities that we give to prison inmates.

According to the passage, a group home system has all of the following advantages over the current foster care system EXCEPT