Should companies (businesses) ensure that they employ a quota (or fixed percentage) of women in all jobs, or is this an impractical concept? Discuss both sides of this debate, and reach a conclusion based on your own opinion.

Nowadays, some people feel that the

number

Use synonyms

of females in all kinds of jobs should be fixed at a certain

number

Use synonyms

,

however

Linking Words

, others claim that

this

Linking Words

can not be expected. I would argue that

gender

Use synonyms

shouldn't change the policy of business. On the one hand, deserving a career that

gender

Use synonyms

should not be affected the way that when somebody will be hired.

That is

Linking Words

to say, if an employee meets all requirements in a professional business, their

gender

Use synonyms

wouldn't be a necessary criterion. White-collar employment,

for instance

Linking Words

, just required their capability of knowledge, which their appearance an important factor. As a consequence, the criteria of hiring someone should be specifically about their ability for the job.

On the other hand

Linking Words

, in terms of strength, scientifically proven that male muscles are stronger than females. In

this

Linking Words

case, a job which needs highly intense labour,

gender

Use synonyms

plays a crucial role in hiring a worker. A furniture company,

for instance

Linking Words

, needed strong labour, for

this

Linking Words

, the company clearly will look for a man who is enabled to meet their requirements.

As a result

Linking Words

, certain jobs should be considered

gender

Use synonyms

whilst searching for an employee. In conclusion, the

number

Use synonyms

of women is one of the controversial issues in business whether should be fixed to a certain

number

Use synonyms

or not. In my humble opinion,

although

Linking Words

specific jobs are required a strong body, females and males are equally important in most working environments.