Refer to the hr reports in the inquirer. through past investments in recruiting and training chester has obtained a productivity index of 113.4%. this means that chester's labor costs would be increased by 13.4% 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?