Logical Deduction — Statements & Conclusions Statement: "A large majority of the workforce in India is unorganised. Most of them earn either minimum or uncertain wages, while others are engaged in sundry jobs." Which conclusions follow?

Introduction / Context:
This item asks you to avoid overreach. The statement characterizes the unorganised sector; the conclusions try to draw inferences about the organised sector and about fixed incomes within the unorganised sector.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Description: Most unorganised workers earn minimum/uncertain wages; the rest do sundry jobs.
• Conclusion I: Organised-sector workers get better facilities and longer tenure.
• Conclusion II: Some unorganised workers have regular and fixed income.

Concept / Approach:
logically valid conclusions must be entailed by the premise. Facts about A (unorganised) do not by themselves prove anything about B (organised). Also, "most have minimum or uncertain wages" does not assert that "some have regular fixed wages."

Step-by-Step Solution:
Conclusion I fails: The premise never mentions facilities or tenure in the organised sector. Comparative claims require explicit data.Conclusion II fails: Saying most face minimum/uncertain wages and others do sundry jobs does not imply "some enjoy regular fixed wages." Sundry jobs may also be irregular; nothing guarantees fixed income.

Verification / Alternative check:
Construct a model population where every unorganised worker either earns minimum wage (not fixed beyond minimum) or has irregular sundry work; in such a model, both conclusions remain unproven, showing they are not entailed.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• I or II individually: each asserts more than the premise supports.
• Both: combines two unsupported inferences.

Common Pitfalls:
Leaping from "most/others" phrasing to an invented "some with fixed salaries"; importing stereotypes about the organised sector.

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II follows