The workers at Bell Manufacturing will shortly go on strike unless the management increases their wages.
Conclusion (So)
Some of Bell’s subsidiaries will be sold.
Evidence
The workers at Bell Manufacturing will shortly go on strike unless the management increases their wages. As Bell’s president is well aware, however, in order to increase the workers’ wages, Bell would have to sell off some of its subsidiaries.
Evaluate
"Unless" is a conditional logic indicator so we might want to diagram this one.
The workers at Bell Manufacturing will shortly go on strike unless the management increases their wages.
~ S → IW ( or, if you replace unless with if not, ~ IW → S )
As Bell’s president is well aware, however, in order to increase the workers’ wages, Bell would have to sell off some of its subsidiaries.
IW → SSS
The conclusion of this argument isn't a conditional, it's a statement of fact: some subsidiaries will be sold.
SSS.
What would allow us to conclude that fact? Triggering a conditional with that necessary condition! Increasing wages would do the job according to the second premise. But we could also get the job done by chaining the first premise to the second. If you used the "replace unless with if not" method of diagramming statement 1, you may need to contrapose to make the chain.
~ S → IW → SSS
So, if we know the workers can't go on strike, that gets the job done too.
Goal
Sufficient Assumption questions, especially conditional ones, are highly predictable, so hopefully we're going to the answers knowing roughly what we're looking for: a statement of fact that tells us that wages must increase or a strike is not possible.