4 ms·
On an individual basis that makes sense (in particular if you really handle it like a service exchange contract, with little to no management on how the person
by makeitdouble 3y ago
On an individual basis that makes sense (in particular if you really handle it like a service exchange contract, with little to no management on how the person do their work)
In this day and age though, I wonder how much it actually works . For instance if one of your contractor does something completely illegal in your country and you get media backlash for it, you're in a tight position if that thing was perfectly legal on their side, and wasn't covered by the contract as you had your own country's law in mind.
I'm not sure you could push your country's law on them, nor that it would help your situation as your company is still fronting the backlash.
- ipaddr 3y agoThat seems so rare it is not worth worrying about
- makeitdouble 3y agoIn the grand scheme, having remote workers not handled by a proxy company is also extremely rare. And even in that setup, we all remember Nike and many other apparel makers stuck with the "child worker in a factory" image basically forever. Or Apple being questionned about FoxConn's working conditions, or the environmental impact. When it comes to PR, pushing the responsibility to the foreign contractor doesn't looks like a good working strategy IMHO.