Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT108 S3 Q22 Explanation

Jim: I hear that the company

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsPrinciple-Strengthen

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Jim: I hear that the company is considering giving Fred and Dorothy 25 percent raises. That would make their salaries higher than mine. Since I have worked here longer than they have, it would be unfair to to at least what theirs will be.

Tasha: Thirty-five employees have been here the same length of time you have and earn the same salary you earn. It would be salary without raising theirs.

What this question is testing

Principle-Strengthen

Jim

Jim's claim:

Tasha

Tasha's claim:

Evaluate

Find the common thread. Jim wants his pay >= the pay of newer employees. Tasha wants Jim's pay = the pay of equal-tenure employees. Both are saying: pay should track tenure. Specifically, you can't pay someone more than someone else unless that person has been there longer.

Tasha's case (equal tenure) means no one should be paid more. Jim's case (longer tenure) means he shouldn't be paid less. Both are sub-cases of the same rule.

Goal

Find the principle: never pay one employee more than another unless the first has been there longer.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
22.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify both

Answer choices

  1. Bad Match4% picked this

    In order to be fair, a business must pay identical salaries to employees

    This makes fairness depend on identical duties. Neither speaker mentions duties — they argue from tenure. Tasha's case (equal tenure, equal pay) might be defensible under this principle if the 35 employees have identical duties, but Jim's case is about longer tenure earning at least as much, regardless of duties. The principle doesn't justify Jim's position.

  2. Bad Match11% picked this

    In order to be fair, a business must pay an employee a salary commensurate with his or her

    This grounds fairness in experience in the field generally, not in tenure at this company. Both Jim and Tasha use tenure-at-the-company language ("I have worked here longer," "have been here the same length of time you have"). Field experience is broader than the at-company metric they use.

  3. Too Strong11% picked this

    In order to be fair, a business must always pay one employee more than another if the first employee has worked for the

    This says longer tenure must always mean higher pay ("must always pay one employee more"). That contradicts Tasha's case directly: 35 employees have the same tenure as Jim and the same pay. Under this principle, all 35 would have to be paid different amounts — which Tasha calls fair. Tasha's position is incompatible with this principle.

  4. Correct72% picked this

    In order to be fair, a business must never pay one employee more than another unless the first employee has worked for the

    Why this is right

    This is the unifying principle. "Never pay one employee more than another unless the first has worked there longer." Apply to Jim: Fred/Dorothy haven't worked longer than Jim, so they can't be paid more than him — unless Jim is also raised to match. ✓ Apply to Tasha: Jim hasn't worked longer than the other 35 (they're equal), so he can't be paid more than them — meaning if Jim is raised, they must be raised too. ✓ Both positions follow.

    Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Bad Match2% picked this

    In order to be fair, a business must always pay employees a salary commensurate with the amount of

    This bases fairness on hours worked per day, but neither speaker mentions daily hours — they reason about cumulative tenure. The principle doesn't track either argument.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free