Refer to the HR Reports in the Inquirer. Through past investments in recruiting and training Chester has obtained a productivity index of 109.4%. This means that Chester's labor costs would be increased by 9.4% if it did not have these productivity improvements. This is a competitive advantage that Chester can sustain or even widen further if its competitors have no HR initiatives. Now, refer to the Income Statement in Chester's Annual Report. How much did Chester's productivity improvements save it in direct labor costs (in thousands) last year? a) $3,143
b) $3,065
c) $29,809
d) $821

Note:

I wasn't able to access the Chester Income Statement but I successfully accessed a similar question Digby.

The Complete Question is as under:

Refer to the HR Reports in the Inquirer. Through past investments in recruiting and training Digby has obtained a productivity index of 109.6%. This means that Digby's labor costs would be increased by 9.6% if it did not have these productivity improvements. This is a competitive advantage that Digby can sustain or even widen further if its competitors have no HR initiatives. Now, refer to the Income Statement in Digby's Annual Report. How much did Digby's productivity improvements save it in direct labor costs (in thousands) last year?

A. $766

B. $29818

C. $3137

D. $3211

Option D. $3,137

Explanation:

The Productivity Index of 9.6% shows that if the improvement plan is implemented then the efficiency gains would result in saving of 9.6% of total direct cost. So if we total the direct cost for the year for all of the four products then we have an amount of $32,680 which is given at the second last column.

The amount saved last year would be:

Savings = $32,680 * 9.6% = $3,137

Hence the option C is correct here.

answerprotecting competitors;

answeri believe this is (true );