Two Notices, One Rider: Choosing a Job Under Constraints
Notice A (campus board): "The Language Cafe needs student staff. Tuesdays and Thursdays, 5:00-8:00 p.m. Pay 1,100 yen per hour. You must work both days for the full 10-week term. Training: first Saturday, 10:00-12:00, unpaid. Apply by Friday." Notice B (city library flyer): "English Story Hour volunteer. Saturdays, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m., unpaid, free lunch, certificate after 8 sessions. One Saturday per month minimum." Notice C (email from a tour company): "Weekend tour assistant. Saturdays and Sundays, 9:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m., 5,000 yen per day, English required. Must commit to both days." The student: classes end at 4:40 on Tuesdays and Thursdays; the Language Cafe is a 20-minute bike ride from campus; Saturdays are free from 11:00 a.m.; Sundays are reserved for a family commitment; the student wants at least 30,000 yen by the end of the 10-week term and wants regular English practice.
1. Which notice satisfies both the money goal and the English-practice goal, and which single constraint most nearly disqualifies it? Support your choice with arithmetic.
Read the worked answer
Notice A. 3 hours x 2 days = 6 hours per week; 6 x 10 weeks = 60 hours; 60 x 1,100 = 66,000 yen, comfortably above the 30,000-yen target, and the setting is an English cafe, so practice is built in.
Nearly disqualifying constraint: class ends 4:40 and the ride takes 20 minutes, so arrival is exactly 5:00 with zero buffer. Any delay - locking a bike, a slow queue - makes the student late. The unpaid Saturday training also overlaps the free window (free from 11:00, training until 12:00), a one-hour conflict that must be negotiated, not ignored.
Why not the others: B pays nothing, so it fails the money goal outright (the certificate and lunch are not income). C pays 5,000 x 2 x 10 = 100,000 yen but requires Sunday, which the family commitment rules out. Only A clears both tests - and only if the arrival margin is addressed.
2. Notice B is unpaid, yet a strong candidate could still choose it. Under what condition would B be the better choice, and what would the student give up?
Read the worked answer
B becomes rational only if the 30,000-yen goal is met another way - a scholarship payment, savings, or a paid job that does not collide with Saturday mornings. Money is a constraint, not a preference, so once it is satisfied the comparison changes.
What B offers: low-pressure spoken English in a structured setting, a certificate after 8 sessions, and a commitment of only 2 hours per month. That is attractive for a student who wants practice without a 6-hour weekly load or a 5:00 p.m. dash across campus.
What is given up: roughly 2 hours of paid work per week, the regularity that builds fluency (2 hours a month is thin), and the workplace experience of a paid role. There is also a scheduling catch: Saturday free time begins at 11:00, so only the 11:00-12:00 portion is available unless the library agrees to a partial shift. B is better only with both conditions met.
3. Assume the student accepts Notice A. Write the two questions to ask before signing, and say what each protects against.
Read the worked answer
"Can the unpaid Saturday training be done on another date, or does it have to be the first Saturday 10:00-12:00?" This protects the one hour of Saturday that is genuinely free and prevents a preventable no-show on day one.
"Class ends at 4:40 and the ride is 20 minutes, so I arrive at 5:00 exactly. Is a five-minute grace period acceptable, or should my shift start at 5:10?" This protects against being marked late for a structural reason, not a personal one.
Both questions target facts the notices do not state and that determine whether the job is workable: the training rule and the punctuality rule. Asking about pay or dress code is lower priority because those rarely cause the arrangement to collapse. A question is worth asking when a bad answer would change the decision.