A recent court decision has qualified a 1998 ruling that workers cannot be laid off if they have been given reason to believe that their jobs will be safe, provided that their performance remains satisfactory.
if they have been given reason to believe that their jobs will
if they are given reason for believing that their jobs would still
having been given reason for believing that their jobs would
having been given reason to believe their jobs to
given reason to believe that their jobs will still
Additionally, B does not make sense because the conditional would is used, but no condition for what would happen is mentioned. In other words, their jobs would still be safe if what? The answer to that question is not provided. If anything the sentence created using B seems to nonsensically convey that the workers cannot be laid off if they are given reason to believe that their jobs would still be safe even though they are being laid off.
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论