Read the following article from a website.
Buses and streetcars in Westhaven stopped running early Saturday morning after transit workers rejected a draft contract late Friday night. The union had said it would give forty-eight hours’ notice before any strike, and riders woke up to empty stops. The province has prepared a back-to-work law that could restore service by Monday, and the city is now asking whether transit should be declared an essential service.
Mayor Gwen Eastman called the stoppage “a broken promise to every rider in this city.” “People planned their weekend around that notice,” Eastman said. “Nurses, cooks and cleaners had no way to get to work. If transit is essential to them, it should be treated as essential by law.” She wants the province to ban transit strikes and send contract disputes to an arbitrator, an outside person who decides, instead. About ninety thousand people ride the system on a normal weekend, she noted.
Dario Fiorillo, a spokesperson for the transit workers’ union, says he and the other members acted out of exhaustion. “Our drivers have worked six-day weeks for two years because the city will not hire enough staff,” Fiorillo said. “Walking out was not a plan. It was anger.” He points out that the city has cancelled its training class for new drivers twice in the past year. He admits the missing notice hurt riders, but he says taking away the right to strike would leave workers with no voice at all.
Adaugo Egwu, who works weekend shifts at a downtown hotel, lost a day’s pay when the buses vanished. “I support fair wages, and I know the drivers are tired,” Egwu said. “But they promised us two days’ warning, and we got none,” she added. Consuelo Gutiérrez, a labour lawyer, says the city should be careful about what comes next. “Back-to-work laws end a strike quickly, but they leave bitterness that lasts for years,” Gutiérrez explained. “The better fix is to agree on notice rules before the next crisis, while everyone is calm.”
Using the drop-down menu (▾), choose the best option according to the information given on the website.
According to Fiorillo, the city 2..
Consuelo Gutiérrez would likely say that a law ending the strike 3..
Paragraph two mainly presents 4..
The author presents the issue as 5..
The following is a comment by a visitor to the website page. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Correct Answer: a transit strike that began without warning
Why this is correct: Buses and streetcars stopped on Saturday, and riders woke up to empty stops even though the union had promised notice. Every speaker reacts to this strike.
Passage Reference: Buses and streetcars in Westhaven stopped running early Saturday morning after transit workers rejected a draft contract late Friday night. ... riders woke up to empty stops
Tips: Check each option against what Eastman, Fiorillo, Egwu and Gutiérrez say. The topic is the thing every speaker talks about.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a plan to raise bus fares: Fares are not mentioned in the article.
- a new contract for hotel workers: Egwu works at a hotel, but the contract in the article is for transit workers.
- the hiring of more transit drivers: Fiorillo says the city will not hire enough staff. No hiring plan is described.
Correct Answer: has left drivers working far too many days
Passage Reference: Our drivers have worked six-day weeks for two years because the city will not hire enough staff
Why this is correct: Fiorillo says drivers have worked six-day weeks for two years because the city will not hire enough staff. So the city has left them working too many days.
Tips: Read Fiorillo’s quotes and the sentences that report his points. Keep the option that one of them states, and drop any idea another speaker gives.
Why the other options are wrong:
- should ban strikes and use an arbitrator: Eastman wants the province to ban transit strikes. Fiorillo says that would leave workers with no voice.
- should agree on notice rules now: Gutiérrez suggests notice rules. Fiorillo does not say this about the city.
- should pay riders back for lost wages: Fiorillo never talks about paying riders back. He admits riders were hurt, but he blames the city for staffing.
Correct Answer: would solve today’s problem but cause new ones
Passage Reference: Back-to-work laws end a strike quickly, but they leave bitterness that lasts for years
Why this is correct: Gutiérrez says back-to-work laws end a strike quickly but leave bitterness that lasts for years. So such a law fixes the stoppage but creates a lasting problem.
Tips: Read Gutiérrez’s quoted sentences closely. Choose the view her words lead to, and drop any view that belongs to another speaker.
Why the other options are wrong:
- is the best way to protect riders: Gutiérrez thinks a better fix is to agree on notice rules ahead of time. She does not call the law the best way.
- would take away the workers’ only voice: Fiorillo says this about losing the right to strike. Gutiérrez talks about bitterness, not voice.
- would stop drivers from feeling so tired: Driver fatigue is Fiorillo’s point. Gutiérrez never says the law would help with it.
Correct Answer: the mayor’s call to protect the service by law
Passage Reference: If transit is essential to them, it should be treated as essential by law. ... She wants the province to ban transit strikes
Why this is correct: “Paragraph two” quotes Mayor Eastman. She says transit should be treated as essential by law and wants transit strikes banned.
Tips: Read the lines of “Paragraph two” one sentence at a time. Then choose the description that fits those lines, not another part of the article.
Why the other options are wrong:
- the union’s reasons for walking off the job: Fiorillo explains why drivers walked out, but his words are not in “Paragraph two”.
- a rider’s story and a lawyer’s advice: Egwu and Gutiérrez speak later in the article, not in “Paragraph two”.
- the terms of the contract that was rejected: The article never gives the terms of the rejected contract.
Correct Answer: an event that raises a wider question for the city
Passage Reference: the city is now asking whether transit should be declared an essential service
Why this is correct: The reporter says the city is now asking whether transit should be an essential service. So the strike has opened a bigger question than one weekend.
Tips: Leave the quotes aside and look at what the reporter writes in plain sentences. Keep only the choice those sentences back up.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a fair protest that the city brought on itself: The reporter never blames the city or calls the strike fair. Only Fiorillo defends it.
- a minor problem that few riders even noticed: The reporter says riders woke up to empty stops. Nothing suggests the stoppage went unnoticed.
- a reckless act that the union should pay for: The reporter never says the union should be punished. That would be an opinion the reporter does not give.
Correct Answer: forty-eight
Passage Reference: The union had said it would give forty-eight hours’ notice before any strike
Why this is correct: The union had said it would give forty-eight hours’ notice before any strike.
Tips: The commenter needs a number of hours. Check the warning the union had promised riders.
Why the other options are wrong:
- twelve: Twelve hours is much less than the union promised.
- twenty-four: Twenty-four hours is less than the union promised.
- seventy-two: Seventy-two hours is more than the union promised.
Correct Answer: cleaners
Passage Reference: Nurses, cooks and cleaners had no way to get to work.
Why this is correct: Eastman says nurses, cooks and cleaners had no way to get to work.
Tips: Find the workers the mayor names who could not reach their jobs.
Why the other options are wrong:
- students: Eastman does not mention students.
- teachers: Eastman does not mention teachers.
- drivers: The drivers are the ones on strike. Eastman names other workers.
Correct Answer: anger
Passage Reference: Walking out was not a plan. It was anger.
Why this is correct: Fiorillo says walking out was not a plan. It was anger.
Tips: The commenter repeats the union spokesperson’s own word for the walkout. Find what he says it was instead of a plan.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a mistake: Fiorillo admits riders were hurt, but he does not call the walkout a mistake.
- a warning: Fiorillo does not describe the walkout as a warning.
- a test: Fiorillo does not describe the walkout as a test.
Correct Answer: a day’s pay
Passage Reference: Adaugo Egwu, who works weekend shifts at a downtown hotel, lost a day’s pay when the buses vanished.
Why this is correct: Egwu lost a day’s pay when the buses vanished.
Tips: Read what happened to the hotel worker during the stoppage. The blank is what she lost.
Why the other options are wrong:
- her job: Egwu did not lose her job.
- a week’s pay: Egwu lost less than a week’s pay.
- her apartment: Housing is not mentioned in the article.
Correct Answer: Monday
Passage Reference: The province has prepared a back-to-work law that could restore service by Monday
Why this is correct: The province’s back-to-work law could restore service by Monday.
Tips: Check the day the province hopes its law could get the buses moving again.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Sunday: The article does not say service could return by Sunday.
- Wednesday: Wednesday is not mentioned in the article.
- Friday: Friday is when the contract was rejected, not when service could return.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation