Running head: CRITICAL THINKING

Critical Thinking An Assignment Submitted by Name of Student Name of Establishment

CRITICAL THINKING Table of Contents

1. Introduction3 2. Reasons to Resist3 3. Values and Assumptions5 4. Evidence Analysis..6 5. Significance of Information Presented...8 6. Conclusion..9 References11

CRITICAL THINKING 1. Introduction. Since the first states were organized the terms government and private property exist

and function. For modern society these two types of property present the story of the constant rivalry, the competition between privatization and state power. The issue under consideration in this memo is an attempt to privatize one of the government properties, the states Department of Motor Vehicles information systems. Through this memo the APEU Director of Human Resources, Ms. Mary Ford, tries to persuade the President, APEU Local No. 121, Mr. Hector Fuentes, in the importance of resisting the privatization. The conclusion that Ms. Ford drives is clearly seen from the very beginning of the memo. It is written in a simple manner, without the use of much professional terminology and the conclusion that Ms. Ford drives to is easy to grasp to any person. In spite of the fact that Ms. Ford follows the traditional memos structure, this memo is longer than accepted and is written in an unprofessionally emotional manner.

2. Reasons to Resist. The reasons to resist the privatization are presented in the discussion part, the longest one. The first reasons that Ms. Ford describes are economical ones. According to her, privatization will lead to the increase of foreign agents, working in the DMV information systems, whose work will be underpaid in comparison to the country citizens. As a result, the government will get an opportunity to decrease the salaries for the state workers implementing the same job. In spite of the fact that this may be quite long term process, she is sure that the decrease of wages is just one of the negative consequences. Another economical reason to resist she discusses is closely coupled with working ethics. Ms. Ford stresses that the term similar job is too obscure and ambiguous and it does not clearly describe what the

CRITICAL THINKING present day workers of DMV information systems department will get instead. Moreover, MS. Ford argues with economical justification of the privatization attempt, given by Governor Gloria Gainor, stating that there will be no decrease in expenditures. Political reasons Ms. Ford suggests include the fact that Governor Gainors idea is a potential violation of the Pendleton Act of 1883, which curbed arbitrary and capricious acts of management and established that civil servants will be hired and retained on the basis of merit (Attached Memo). Another political reason is an attempt to interest Mr. Fuentes in resisting the Governors attempt in order to improve his own image among the members of the Union to be re-elected next year. The last reason Ms. Ford suggests concerns security of the data that will be privatized and, as a result, may be lost because of the unprofessional treatment or neglect that is often observed in private companies.

As it was mentioned above, this memo is written not in dry, professional tone, but it is quite emotional and many words and phrases in the memo can be questioned and doubted. However, the use of these words and phrases can be found only in the discussion and conclusion parts. The issue and its background are described in a clear and professional manner. The first paragraph of discussion starts with the critique of the Governors idea. Ms. Fords states that it is an assault on our union, It is anti-American (Attached Memo). These phrases are too strong, making the critique sound irrational. Instead of assault Ms. Ford could easily use any other synonym with less strong negative connotation. Moreover, as a country of freedom, America is oriented on private property creation and saving money. It is sometimes unclear whether Ms. Ford does not like the idea of outsourcing itself or the Governor, who suggested it. One of the ambiguous arguments that Ms. Ford uses is her brother-in-laws ideas. There is no definite information about this person and it is unclear whether he has the professional background to criticize the actions of government managers. In case he has not, the use of his words is equal to stopping a stranger in the street and asking

CRITICAL THINKING him to comment on the present day situation in Foreign Affairs Department, for instance.

Surely, it is possible to suggest that Mr. Fuentes knows her brother-in-law. However, the fact that she mentions nothing about him means that Mr. Fuentes wither knows him really well or they friends with her brother-in-law. Otherwise, it is accepted to give some hints to make the reader aware what person is described. When Ms. Ford gives the evidence from the Wall Street newspaper, she states that she uses a recent article. The term recent is quite difficult to interpret definitely as it may be the last week article or the article she read yesterday during lunch. Ambiguous and doubtful words are used to describe the newspaper itself. Moreover, the phrase the other day she uses is also far from giving the definite time of the lunch she had with a group of the union members.

3. Values and Assumptions. In tote, the assumptions that Ms. Ford makes are quite weak and should be supported by at least some statistical data. The probability of the development of the situation as Ms. Ford describes it is unclear; there are many other ways of development of relationships between the government and outsourced companies as well as between the government and the Union. Among the strong assumptions that are mentioned by Ms. Ford is the assumption about re-education of the union members. On the one hand, this method is a great mean of getting another chance and another profession for the union members. It is quite widely used in modern world where the need in some professions appears and dies out quite quickly. On the other hand, as Ms. Ford states, this method is unacceptable to the older union members, who are usually reluctant to risk and to change something in their lives. As a result, they may just lose their jobs without a chance of finding a substitution during the period of recession.

CRITICAL THINKING Another strong assumption is the economic argument, used by Ms. Ford at the end of the discussion part. Surely, to prove that outsourcing may result in the increase of expenditures, instead of decreasing them should be proved better and there is no enough statistics. However, the fact that in case a foreign company will get the contract, the problem of the culture clash is inevitable. This issue should be thought over before making any conclusion about outsourcing. Moreover, the question where the new job places will be taken from during the time of economic recession is also a strong assumption, directly leading to the suggested conclusion. However, the assumption that management uses a promise for rehire to gain union support for outsourcing and 80% of the time they dont keep their promise (Attached Memo) is nothing but a personal critique of the fired person. To prove these words Ms. Ford

should have described at least the situation of the firing her brother-in-law. This is one of the fallacies in the memo. Another fallacy here is that private companies will be less obedient and accountable to the public as government ones. Surely, outsourcing of information system is a serious step that will decrease the governmental control over the data; however, the level of public control will not decrease as any private company that executes the governmental orders strives to work as hard as possible to prove its high level standards. Moreover, many companies work hard to get the government contracts because such contracts may improve their image and bring real profit. This assumption is not the best argument to support Ms. Fords conclusion.

4. Evidence Analysis. Unfortunately, the evidences that Ms. Ford gives to support her reasons and her conclusion are not really reliable and sometimes seem to be even made-up. For instance,

CRITICAL THINKING there is no real evidence that outsourcing of DMV information systems will give any opportunity to the state government to decrease the workers wages in future. Moreover, it is not clear why Ms. Ford thinks that foreign agents will get the work in the outsourced department. Is the fact that foreign agents will implement that work is absolutely clear? Was it already discussed somewhere? Is it a normal practice for the local companies to turn to the foreign agents to decrease their expenditures? None of these questions is answered. The weakness of her next evidence has already been discussed earlier. It is a professional memo where the professional question is discussed. That is why each evidence should be carefully selected and weighted. Otherwise, the use of such evidences during the negotiations with the Governor will lead to the development of unprofessional image. It is better to use the opinion of some more or less known professional than the words of Ms. Fords brother-in-law. Another serious problem with the evidences she suggests further is the fact that the sources she takes are unreliable. Wikipedia is not the best choice and to search for evidences through this website is equal to presenting unprofessional and unverified evidences. Even in case Ms. Ford used Wikipedia for the primary search, she should have used some other reliable source about the Pendleton Act of 1883 to prove that the actions that the Governor suggests can violate it. Therewith, it is better to name all the sources, used to provide the evidences, for others to find them easily. However, Ms. Ford states according to a recent article posted in a prestigious Wall Street newspaper (Attached Memo). What is that prestigious Wall Street newspaper? Why she is sure that it is prestigious? In fact, the use of word prestigious is wrong here as it is not really applicable to the professional newspaper.

Prestigious means liked by the majority, having status or glamour; impressive and influential

CRITICAL THINKING for majority. Professional Wall Street newspapers have never been prestigious as their target market is specific and quite limited.

It is not really clear whether there is some rival cause for the conclusion that Ms. Ford has made. However, her tone and negative emotions to the Governor Gloria Gainor and state government on the whole give the reader a right to suggest that she feels no respect for both. The use of phrases like the governor is a bully may be interpreted into different ways. Thus, the emotional tone and some kind of lack of restraint through the memo give the reader a right to suggest that there are at least some rivalry causes and the conclusion, made by Ms. Ford and it is based mostly on her personal view point only.

5. Significance of Information Presented. One of the problems observed in the memo is the lack of statistical information. While statistics is often used to mislead a person or to make the text look more professional, Ms. Ford uses the opposite variant. She does not use any real statistical data to prove her reasons and to support her evidences. On the one hand the lack of statistical information is a serious plus of the memo as it helps the reader to understand its plot and not to be deceived by different numbers. The fact that she writers to a President of the union does not mean that the later is good with numbers. As a result, this may just help him to deal with the problem. On the other hand the problem is that the reasons that Ms. Ford gives require at least some statistical information. The only time some definite data are used is the time when she cites her brother-in-law word. The problem is that this statics cannot be taken as a reliable one. That is why it is possible to state that the lack of statistics as well as the use of misleading unreliable one weakens the reasons and arguments Ms. Ford presents.

CRITICAL THINKING

In tote, the level of significance of information, presented by Ms. Ford is really low as there is no statistical, scientific or any other clear base for such arguments. This memo seems to be written by a person, who has no specific political or economical knowledge. As a result, there is a lot of other significant information that could have been mentioned in the memo, but it is omitted. For instance, there is no clear description of the Pendleton Act. Ms. Ford just states that the Governors idea may violate it. However, this Act deals with several issues and to understand what can be violated it is important to single out the very issue from the Pendleton Act that the Governors plan concerns. Ms. Ford believes that the contract will be given to the corporation, which in their turn, have almost no responsibilities to report to public. The fact is that the company is unknown by the time the memo is written. Moreover, in spite of the variety of loopholes that corporation may use to avoid the law obedience there is also such thing as the contract. The problem of responsibility can be discussed there.

6. Conclusion. During the first reading, especially by the reader, who does not have the profound knowledge of management, politics, and economics, this memo may seem to be a well writen piece of anti-privatization propaganda. However, the close investigation of the reasons and evidences, suggested by Ms. Ford shows the lack of realism in the picture she tries to draw. Ms. Ford, having no deep knowledge in the spheres she faces, seems to writer to a person with the same level of awareness in political and economic sciences. Surely, she has the reasons to worry, especially during the period recession and she has a right to foresee the worst results of the suggested plan. Moreover, as a member of a union she has to foresee the worst of the possible results. However, this does not mean that the reasons and arguments for

CRITICAL THINKING

10

these worst results should not be scientifically based and justified. This is one of the reasons why I find the conclusion she draws unreliable. Another important reason is the fact that Ms. Ford uses psychological reasons to persuade her reader. She suggests that struggling against the governors plan may help the President to improve his image and to get a chance to be reelected next year. In spite of the fact that this psychological method is a normal thing in politics, the use of it in a memo is not the best way to show the strength of the arguments. In case Ms. Ford would have been sure about her arguments, she would have used just the fact that the union members do not like the idea of outsourcing the systems.

CRITICAL THINKING References Attached Memo. Memos. Retrieved Sept. 6, 2012, from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/590/01/ Pendleton Act (1883). Retrieved Sept. 6, 2012, from

11

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/print_friendly.php?flash=true&page=&doc=48&title= Pendleton+Act+(1883)