And that clearly says that the person in question is a regular employee. Just what the heck do you think the words "employment ... under a contract of service" means? If you are a regular salaried employee or working for a wage you are employed under a contract of service. But a vendor who sells you his services where you are one of a number of clients who he provides those services to is not working FOR you under a "contract of service" as your employee.

Steve, I think a contract of service means.... (drumroll).... a contract to perform service. You know Steve, instead of trying to slight me, you could actually have been useful and help provide a definition... Are you here to help or here to scrap?


You would imagine wrong. There are several principles of common law, shared by both the US and Canada that define who is and who isn't an employee and what working conditions determine a "contract of service" of employment.
And...

In the context of a videographer shooting at your event, if you provide the camera, tell him what and when to shoot directing the specific shots he takes, take delivery of the raw tape at the end of the shoot and/or supervise the editing, he would probably be considered your employee for the event.

Steve... you say my example is incorrect... and then right below it you use almost the same example I just made supporting the same point I was trying to make? Brilliant move! Say that I'm wrong.. then say the exact same thing and proclaim it right! I bet you can win all kinds of arguements with that!

Unfortunately, I have better things to do than join you in grade three rhetoric.

This thread has gone on far to long. There's plenty of information here for readers to make their own interpretations. Case closed.