Reducing waste at a bakery

Answer: “The bakery already owns them.”. Evidence: “The crates are already owned by the bakery”. Check “Each cafe already owns the crates it will receive.”: This gives the action or role to the wrong person or group. Check “Existing cardboard boxes can be made returnable.”: This is not the item named for this action.

Answer: “Both unsold loaves and damaged packaging will be recorded.”. Evidence: “From Monday, we will record both.”. Check “Only packaging will be recorded.”: This says the opposite of the relevant detail. Evidence: “During last month’s stock review, we found that we were counting unsold loaves but not the damaged packaging we threw away each day.”. Check “Unsold bread will stop being recorded once packaging is counted.”: This says the opposite of the relevant detail.

Answer: “Three cafes on North Road.”. Evidence: “deliveries to the three cafes on North Road will use returnable plastic crates”. Check “Deliveries of bread slices to the usual food partner.”: This is not the item named for this action. Evidence: “slices left from sandwich preparation will be set aside for our usual food partner”. Check “All cafes that buy from the bakery.”: This makes the statement wider or stronger than the text allows.

Answer: “Damaged packaging was not being counted.”. Evidence: “we were counting unsold loaves but not the damaged packaging we threw away each day.”. Check “The bakery had counted packaging but not unsold loaves.”: This says the opposite of the relevant detail. Check “Unsold loaves had never been recorded.”: This says the opposite of the relevant detail.

Answer: “The next morning.”. Evidence: “Cafe staff will leave empty crates ready for collection the next morning.”. Check “Only at the end of the two-week trial.”: This is not the time asked for. Check “On the next Friday after the trial ends.”: This is not the time asked for.

Answer: “A system working for three cafes must also work for many homes.”. Evidence: “A successful result for three regular business stops would not automatically mean the same system works for dozens of separate homes.”. Check “Returnable crates can never work for a home-delivery customer.”: This makes the statement wider or stronger than the text allows. Evidence: “We will review the cafe trial before changing home deliveries.”. Check “Packaging can become damaged.”: This is a stated fact, not the assumption that the memo warns against making. Evidence: “the damaged packaging we threw away each day.”.

Answer: “Returning packaging would add too much route time.”. Evidence: “For now, that would add too much time to the route.”. Check “The manager has already measured every home route and found them unsuitable.”: This makes the statement wider or stronger than the text allows. Check “All home customers have agreed to a later start date.”: The text does not give this detail. Do not add it.

Answer: “Too much weight can damage the lower loaves.”. Evidence: “the lower loaves can be damaged by too much weight.”. Check “The marked line shows how many loaves the cafe ordered.”: The text does not give this detail. Do not add it. Check “The cafe staff cannot store empty crates.”: The text does not give this detail. Do not add it.

Answer: “The existing food-handling rules.”. Evidence: “only if they meet the existing food-handling rules.”. Check “A longer storage limit whenever food is donated.”: This says the opposite of the relevant detail. Evidence: “This is not permission to keep food for longer than we normally allow.”. Check “Asking a supervisor before every donation, even with no uncertainty.”: This makes the statement wider or stronger than the text allows. Evidence: “Any uncertainty should go to the shift supervisor”.

Answer: “The shift supervisor.”. Evidence: “Any uncertainty should go to the shift supervisor”. Check “The cafe staff storing the empty crates.”: This gives the action or role to the wrong person or group. Check “Whichever delivery worker arrives first.”: This gives the action or role to the wrong person or group.

Answer: “Missing crates, collection time and storage difficulties.”. Evidence: “we will compare damaged packaging, missing crates and the extra minutes spent collecting them. We will also ask the cafe staff whether storing the empties caused problems.”. Check “Only whether the three cafes bought more bread.”: This uses a different test of success from the one in the text. Check “Only the number of crates originally owned by the bakery.”: This uses a different test of success from the one in the text. Evidence: “The crates are already owned by the bakery”.

Answer: “Waste reduction must also be safe and practical.”. Evidence: “the system must be safe and manageable for the people using it.”. Check “Less rubbish is enough, even when handling becomes unsafe.”: This uses a different test of success from the one in the text. Check “Safety rules may be relaxed if all spare food is donated.”: This says the opposite of the relevant detail. Evidence: “only if they meet the existing food-handling rules.”.