Transexpertise (asker) Nov 12, 2017:

Je dois admettre que pour le coup, je n'ai pas assez réfléchi et que j'ai tiré des conclusions beaucoup trop hâtives, merci de m'avoir remise dans le droit chemin :)

Daryo Nov 6, 2017:

"Suitable for
1- contractors,
2- councils,
3- roadsides,
4- estates,
5- vineyards and
6- orchard applications.",

these 6 distinct elements of a list and

"1- contractors" are most ordinary independent gardening / landscaping contractors [using their own lawnmowers] while

"2- councils"- is another element of the list different from and independent from 1) - local councils that may have full time employee gardeners that would use these lawnmowers [supplied by their employer- the council].

I really don't see how you could conclude that "contractors" are full-time employees of the council simply because they are mentioned one after the other in a list. Isn't the whole point of a list is that elements are supposed to be distinct from each other?

"school contractor in charge of the garden"=> a contractor [thus NOT an employee of the school] contracted by the school [=> not an employee of the school, but an independent service provider] to do the gardening, same as the school would "contract" an independent/self-employed electrician or a painter, or a small company providing various services.

Daryo Nov 6, 2017:

there is nothing unusual in the type of "contractors" mentioned in the ST - these are "contractors" of the most bog standard variety operating in the landscaping / gardening business. I don't know by which feat of "creative parsing" you've managed to equate them with employees, but there is no way that a "contractor [= independent/self employed / sole trader] could be an employee - if you believe that possible, you can as well start counting the number of angles of a circle ...

Transexpertise (asker) Nov 5, 2017:

For example :"Suitable for contractors, councils, roadsides, estates, vineyards and orchard applications.", or "school contractor in charge of the garden"...

Transexpertise (asker) Nov 5, 2017:

I know that it's the usual definition, but here it is not a seasonal worker or else, it is an employee :/

Daryo Nov 5, 2017:

a "contractor" is someone who "makes contracts" with those who need his/here services - and these are not "employment contracts" IOW it's not an employee - not in year of Sundays - it's someone who's its own boss, possibly employing other people.

david henrion Nov 5, 2017:

Noté. Dans ce cas j'exclurais le terme "maintenance" car il ne peut s'appliquer aux espaces verts. Je dirais "personnel d'entretien".

Transexpertise (asker) Nov 5, 2017:

Dans ce cas, pas forcément, il s'agit même de la personne qui travaille dans l'école, dans la mairie ou autre qui est chargé de l'entretien, a priori au sens large, et dans tous les cas au moins de l'entretien des espaces verts

david henrion Nov 5, 2017:

Bonsoir, ce ne serait pas plutôt des entreprises externes ?!