In Japan many workers for large corporations have a guarantee of lifetime employment. They will not be laid off during recessions(經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條) or when the tasks they perform are taken over by robots. To some observes, this is capitalism at its best, because workers are treated as people not things. Others see it as necessarily inefficient and believe it cannot continue if Japan is to remain competitive with foreign corporations more concerned about profits and less concerned about people.
Defenders of the system argue that those who call it inefficient do not understand how it really works. In the first place not every Japanese worker has the guarantee of a lifetime job. The lifetime employment system includes only “regular employees”. Many employees do not fall into this category, including all women. All businesses have many part-time and temporary employees. These workers are hired and laid off during the course of the business cycle just as employees in the United States are. These “irregular workers” make up about 10 percent of the nonagricultural work force. Additionally, Japanese firms maintain some flexibility through the extensive use of subcontractors. This practice is much more common in Japan than in the United States.
The use of both subcontractors and temporary workers has increased markedly in Japan since the 1974-1975 recession. All this leads some to argue that the Japanese system is not all that different from the American system. During recessions Japanese corporations lay off temporary workers and give less business to subcontractors. In the United States, corporations lay off those workers with the least seniority(資歷). The difference then is probably less than the term “l(fā)ifetime employment” suggests, but there still is a difference. And this difference cannot be understood without looking at the values of Japanese society. The relationship between employer and employee cannot be explained in purely contractual(合同的) terms. Firms hold on to the employees and employees stay with one firm. There are also practical reasons for not jumping from job to job. Most retirement benefits come from the employer. Changing jobs means losing these benefits. Also, teamwork is an essential part of Japanese production. Moving to a new firm means adapting to a different team and at least temporarily, lower productivity and lower pay.
1.The observers are divided with regard to their attitudes towards ____.
A)the guarantee of lifetime employment
B)the consequence of recessions and automation
C)the effect of lifetime employment
D)the prospects of capitalism
2.It is stated in the second paragraph that ____.
A)defenders themselves do not appreciate the system
B)about 90% of “irregular workers” are employed in agriculture
C)the business cycle occurs more often in Japan and in the U.S.
D)not all employees can benefit from the policy
3.During recessions those who are to be fired first in the U.S. corporations are ____.
A)regular employees
B)part-time workers
C)junior employees
D)temporary workers
4.According to the passage, Japanese firms differ strikingly from American firms in that the former ____.
A)use subcontractors more extensively
B)are less flexible in terms of lifetime employment
C)hold on to the values of society
D)are more efficient in competition than the latter
5.Which of the following does NOT account for the fact that a Japanese worker is reluctant to change his job?
A)He will probably be underpaid.
B)He will not be entitled to some job benefits.
C)He has been accustomed to the teamwork.
D)He will be looked down upon by his prospective employer.
答案：
1. C) the effect of lifetime employment. 要我說這題沒C的話選A也對, 反正就是討論終身就業(yè)體系的, C比A貼切. B和D完全不對, 參考第一段.
2. D)not all employees can benefit from the policy, 對應(yīng)原文In the first place not every Japanese worker has the guarantee of a lifetime job. A和B反過來說就對了, C本文沒有討論.
3. C)junior employees, 對應(yīng)原文In the United States, corporations lay off those workers with the least seniority(資歷).
4. A)use subcontractors more extensively對應(yīng)原文Additionally, Japanese firms maintain some flexibility through the extensive use of subcontractors. This practice is much more common in Japan than in the United States.
5. D) He will be looked down upon by his prospective employer. 讀懂最后一段就不難選出。。。
參考譯文:
在日本，許多大公司的職工都有終身就業(yè)保障。他們不會因?yàn)榻?jīng)濟(jì)蕭條或所做的工作由機(jī)器人替代而被辭退。某些觀察家認(rèn)為，這是資本主義的狀態(tài)，把工人當(dāng)成人而不是當(dāng)成物對待。其他的觀察家則認(rèn)為這必然會造成效率低下，并認(rèn)為如果日本要想與那些更關(guān)心利潤而很少關(guān)心員工的外國公司抗衡，這種做法就不能持續(xù)下去。
這一體制的維護(hù)者們爭辯道：聲稱該體制效率低下的人并不知道體制的運(yùn)作方式。首先，并不是每個日本工人都享有終身就業(yè)保障。該體制僅僅適用于“正式職工”。許多雇員，包括全部婦女，并不屬于這類職工。所有企業(yè)都有計(jì)時工人和臨時工。在整個經(jīng)營周期中招聘或解雇這些工人，與美國對雇員的做法也無不同之處。這些“非正式工人”約占非農(nóng)業(yè)勞動力的10%。此外，日本的公司通過廣泛利用分包單位的做法保持了處理問題的靈活性。這種做法在日本比在美國更為普遍。
自從1974至1975年經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條以來，在日本使用分包單位和臨時工人的情況明顯地增多了。這一切使得某些人爭辯說，日本的這種制度實(shí)際上與美國的制度無甚差異。在經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條時期，日本公司辭退臨時工，并減少給分包單位的業(yè)務(wù)。在美國，公司解雇那些資歷最淺的工人。那么，這種差異可能要比“終身就業(yè)”這個術(shù)語所暗示的要少，但差異仍然存在。不洞察日本的社會價值觀就不可能理解這一差異。雇主和雇員的關(guān)系不能用純粹的契約關(guān)系來解釋。公司設(shè)法留住雇員，雇員守著一家公司。雇員不跳槽還有一些現(xiàn)實(shí)的因素。大部分退休待遇來自雇主。變換工作意味著失掉這些待遇。而且，團(tuán)體合作是日本生產(chǎn)的基本要素。轉(zhuǎn)到一家新公司意味著要適應(yīng)一個不同的團(tuán)體，至少也要暫時適應(yīng)較低生產(chǎn)率和較低的薪金。
Defenders of the system argue that those who call it inefficient do not understand how it really works. In the first place not every Japanese worker has the guarantee of a lifetime job. The lifetime employment system includes only “regular employees”. Many employees do not fall into this category, including all women. All businesses have many part-time and temporary employees. These workers are hired and laid off during the course of the business cycle just as employees in the United States are. These “irregular workers” make up about 10 percent of the nonagricultural work force. Additionally, Japanese firms maintain some flexibility through the extensive use of subcontractors. This practice is much more common in Japan than in the United States.
The use of both subcontractors and temporary workers has increased markedly in Japan since the 1974-1975 recession. All this leads some to argue that the Japanese system is not all that different from the American system. During recessions Japanese corporations lay off temporary workers and give less business to subcontractors. In the United States, corporations lay off those workers with the least seniority(資歷). The difference then is probably less than the term “l(fā)ifetime employment” suggests, but there still is a difference. And this difference cannot be understood without looking at the values of Japanese society. The relationship between employer and employee cannot be explained in purely contractual(合同的) terms. Firms hold on to the employees and employees stay with one firm. There are also practical reasons for not jumping from job to job. Most retirement benefits come from the employer. Changing jobs means losing these benefits. Also, teamwork is an essential part of Japanese production. Moving to a new firm means adapting to a different team and at least temporarily, lower productivity and lower pay.
1.The observers are divided with regard to their attitudes towards ____.
A)the guarantee of lifetime employment
B)the consequence of recessions and automation
C)the effect of lifetime employment
D)the prospects of capitalism
2.It is stated in the second paragraph that ____.
A)defenders themselves do not appreciate the system
B)about 90% of “irregular workers” are employed in agriculture
C)the business cycle occurs more often in Japan and in the U.S.
D)not all employees can benefit from the policy
3.During recessions those who are to be fired first in the U.S. corporations are ____.
A)regular employees
B)part-time workers
C)junior employees
D)temporary workers
4.According to the passage, Japanese firms differ strikingly from American firms in that the former ____.
A)use subcontractors more extensively
B)are less flexible in terms of lifetime employment
C)hold on to the values of society
D)are more efficient in competition than the latter
5.Which of the following does NOT account for the fact that a Japanese worker is reluctant to change his job?
A)He will probably be underpaid.
B)He will not be entitled to some job benefits.
C)He has been accustomed to the teamwork.
D)He will be looked down upon by his prospective employer.
答案：
1. C) the effect of lifetime employment. 要我說這題沒C的話選A也對, 反正就是討論終身就業(yè)體系的, C比A貼切. B和D完全不對, 參考第一段.
2. D)not all employees can benefit from the policy, 對應(yīng)原文In the first place not every Japanese worker has the guarantee of a lifetime job. A和B反過來說就對了, C本文沒有討論.
3. C)junior employees, 對應(yīng)原文In the United States, corporations lay off those workers with the least seniority(資歷).
4. A)use subcontractors more extensively對應(yīng)原文Additionally, Japanese firms maintain some flexibility through the extensive use of subcontractors. This practice is much more common in Japan than in the United States.
5. D) He will be looked down upon by his prospective employer. 讀懂最后一段就不難選出。。。
參考譯文:
在日本，許多大公司的職工都有終身就業(yè)保障。他們不會因?yàn)榻?jīng)濟(jì)蕭條或所做的工作由機(jī)器人替代而被辭退。某些觀察家認(rèn)為，這是資本主義的狀態(tài)，把工人當(dāng)成人而不是當(dāng)成物對待。其他的觀察家則認(rèn)為這必然會造成效率低下，并認(rèn)為如果日本要想與那些更關(guān)心利潤而很少關(guān)心員工的外國公司抗衡，這種做法就不能持續(xù)下去。
這一體制的維護(hù)者們爭辯道：聲稱該體制效率低下的人并不知道體制的運(yùn)作方式。首先，并不是每個日本工人都享有終身就業(yè)保障。該體制僅僅適用于“正式職工”。許多雇員，包括全部婦女，并不屬于這類職工。所有企業(yè)都有計(jì)時工人和臨時工。在整個經(jīng)營周期中招聘或解雇這些工人，與美國對雇員的做法也無不同之處。這些“非正式工人”約占非農(nóng)業(yè)勞動力的10%。此外，日本的公司通過廣泛利用分包單位的做法保持了處理問題的靈活性。這種做法在日本比在美國更為普遍。
自從1974至1975年經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條以來，在日本使用分包單位和臨時工人的情況明顯地增多了。這一切使得某些人爭辯說，日本的這種制度實(shí)際上與美國的制度無甚差異。在經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條時期，日本公司辭退臨時工，并減少給分包單位的業(yè)務(wù)。在美國，公司解雇那些資歷最淺的工人。那么，這種差異可能要比“終身就業(yè)”這個術(shù)語所暗示的要少，但差異仍然存在。不洞察日本的社會價值觀就不可能理解這一差異。雇主和雇員的關(guān)系不能用純粹的契約關(guān)系來解釋。公司設(shè)法留住雇員，雇員守著一家公司。雇員不跳槽還有一些現(xiàn)實(shí)的因素。大部分退休待遇來自雇主。變換工作意味著失掉這些待遇。而且，團(tuán)體合作是日本生產(chǎn)的基本要素。轉(zhuǎn)到一家新公司意味著要適應(yīng)一個不同的團(tuán)體，至少也要暫時適應(yīng)較低生產(chǎn)率和較低的薪金。