WPA Paper



Oneof the arguments presented by Schlosser is that Occupational Safetyand Health Administration (OSHA) has the mandate of protectingemployees from harm. However, there is a concern that the agency hasrecently cut the number of inspectors serving approximately 7 millionAmerican workplaces. This is an indication that there are lessincidences of inspection in the workplaces, which risks the lives ofworkers. According to the author, deaths reports collected by OSHA asa result of harm are on the increase. There is also a concern thatthe agency has also scrapped laws protecting workers, which furtherrisks the lives of workers.

Schlosserhas also cited loss of limbs, mutilation, head crushing, beheadings,and suffocation as a result of toxic gasses in meatpacking plants.The truth of the matter is that these plants are usually underpressure to speed up their processes, which make it more hazardous toworkers. There is a major concern that these plants need to maximizeprofits in order to survive and these profits have to be maximizedthrough speeding their lines since speeding up their lines has aneffect of increasing their productivity. The author offers an examplewith Kenny Dobbins, who suffered injuries while working in aslaughter house in order to showcase that workers are exposed toharm.

Oneof the most persuasive strategies that the author has used inpresenting his claim entails the use of research. Research iscritical in indicating that the claim that one is making exists andis valid. The author has constantly supported his arguments throughexisting research or through research that has been done. Forinstance, in presenting his argument concerning the issue of thedanger exposed to workers in slaughterhouses, he provides a researchon the number of deaths that have been collected by OSHA as adepiction that his argument concerning the increasing deaths inmeatpacking plants is a reality. Another persuasive strategy that theauthor has used is consistency. It is always critical to showconsistency in an argument in case one wants people to go by hisidea. Lack of consistency in the argument that one is offering maylead to audience have no confidence with the argument that an authoris making. Throughout his line of argument, the author has maintainedconsistency, which is critical in persuading the reader.

Theorganization of the reading is such that the author introduces thereader into a situation, where a person working in a slaughterhousebecomes seriously injured prior to making his argument. This helps inbuilding the argument that the author wants to make. It is after thisintroduction that the author introduces the OSHA agency and therecords of deaths of workers in the meatpacking plants. This buildson the argument that he later presents. Throughout the reading, theauthor maintains consistency, which makes the argument persuasive.

Thereare two assumptions on which the argument of the author is based onone of the assumptions is that eliminating OSHA laws would lead toharming more workers. The other assumption on which the argument isbased on is that reducing the number of OSHA inspectors in factorieswould increase the risk of workers being harmed. The argument is veryconvincing since people likely to be harmed more, where there are norules put in place.


Schlosser,E. (n.d). TheChain Never Stops.Pp 671-681.