The disruption in supply could have been averted if the management employed more staff. vs The disruption in supply could have been averted if the management had employed more staff.

Both phrases are correct, but they are used in slightly different contexts. The first phrase uses the simple past tense 'employed' to suggest a general action that could have prevented the disruption. The second phrase uses the past perfect tense 'had employed' to indicate a specific action that was not taken in the past. Both constructions are grammatically sound and can be used depending on the emphasis the speaker wants to convey.

Last updated: March 28, 2024 • 498 views

The disruption in supply could have been averted if the management employed more staff.

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

This phrase uses the simple past tense 'employed' to suggest a general action that could have prevented the disruption. It implies that the management did not hire more staff in the past.

Alternatives:

the disruption in supply could have been averted if the management had employed more staff.
the disruption in supply could have been avoided if the management had hired more staff.

The disruption in supply could have been averted if the management had employed more staff.

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

This phrase uses the past perfect tense 'had employed' to indicate a specific action that was not taken in the past. It implies a missed opportunity or failure to hire more staff.

Alternatives:

the disruption in supply could have been averted if the management employed more staff.
the disruption in supply could have been avoided if the management hired more staff.

What Our Customers Are Saying

Our customers love us! We have an average rating of 4.79 stars based on 283,125 votes.
Also check out our 2,100+ reviews on TrustPilot (4.9).

"Thank you!"
Sachi Nakama July 2024
"I have literally been through chat, PI, claude, bard and bing and I got conflicting answers! Thank you! Human intelligence reigns!"
Retha July 2024
"Faster than AI"
CYNTHIA December 2023
"This was very helpful and I personally think this site is the best."
Kaden October 2023
"It was extremely thorough and very helpful!"
imperialelisa October 2023
"7 years without any disappointment. Always 100% satisfied. You guys are the best in the world at what you do. Thank you so much :)"
Zubair Alam October 2023
"In a world of text messages and online communication, this is great to have as a live tool. Thank you."
Selena October 2023
"Without textranch I would be stuck!"
宏祐 October 2023
"Accuracy and fast response. Personal comments from editor. Thank you."
Clh September 2023
"I wasn't aware of this service, it's fascinating and more reliable than standard IA tools available on the internet"
Arturo September 2023
"The fact that you can get reliable fast feedback on your texts."
Vinicius Antonio August 2023
"you guys are better than grammarly i'm being honest here"
ordinary July 2023
"OMG! This is really good than any other text correction tools I've used so far. Highly recommend this."
Vehan July 2023
"Very fast and accurate. thank you."
mojtaba July 2023
"I love this app because it's help to writing skills all of students ♥️"
Tarisini July 2023
"This was exactly the mistake I was looking for, the wording dind´t sound right at first. Better than grammarly!"
Ente July 2023
"The immediate help that I received was reassuring and very satisfactory. Thanks."
priiiyanshuu July 2023
"this helps A LOT for my studies."
kathnunez02 June 2023
"Woow!! I would never have expected such precision! Thank you soooo much!!"
Berta June 2023
"Real Time Editor and not AI. Many Thanks."
Priya June 2023
"The very first thing excites me about Textranch is how much your editors care."
sepideh June 2023
"The fact that texts are checked by human editors rather than by AI, etc. I appreciate this!"
Анна June 2023
"Feel welcome, immediate response, high quality feedback"
martin.roy June 2023
"This is the best app that I have ever seen"
Burulai May 2023

The disruption in supply could have been averted if the management employed more staff. vs The disruption in supply could have been averted if the management had employed more staff.