employee

[Raymott]

Okay, here it is: employe - Google Search=

Twenty-one thousand is at least a few, relative to the entire population of Australia, of course.

Let's take a few of these "Australian" uses at random:

Employe Time Clocks to make a come back
Many companies do not know that under the Federal Government's new "WorkChoices" regulations employers were expected to keep records of the hours their employees worked. Employment lawyers Hunt & Hunt confirmed this week that under the WorkChoices regulations that came into effect on March 27 every company in Australia was expected to track the hours of all employees - from the most junior to the managing director or chief executive officer.

"Employe" is the name of the time clock. Further down in the article, the preferred spelling "employee" is used. I think you will find this among many of your 21,000 "Australian" references.

Some other sites don't even contain "employe". The search is picking up on the 'employe' part of employee. eg.
CFMEU Queensland - Search

Another advertises:Macdonald Technologies Employe E Investments

In fact, I'm having a boring time finding a real spelling of 'employe' meaning employee on these sites. Maybe you can find one.



You must be very careful relying on Google for usage like this.

[PROESL]

Let's take a few of these "Australian" uses at random:

Employe Time Clocks to make a come back
Many companies do not know that under the Federal Government's new "WorkChoices" regulations employers were expected to keep records of the hours their employees worked. Employment lawyers Hunt & Hunt confirmed this week that under the WorkChoices regulations that came into effect on March 27 every company in Australia was expected to track the hours of all employees - from the most junior to the managing director or chief executive officer.

"Employe" is the name of the time clock. Further down in the article, the preferred spelling "employee" is used. I think you will find this among many of your 21,000 "Australian" references.

Some other sites don't even contain "employe". The search is picking up on the 'employe' part of employee. eg.
CFMEU Queensland - Search

Another advertises:Macdonald Technologies Employe E Investments

In fact, I'm having a boring time finding a real spelling of 'employe' meaning employee on these sites. Maybe you can find one.



You must be very careful relying on Google for usage like this.

Yes, I agree that you've got to be very careful when it comes to using Google as a kind of generalized "corpus". However, I did happen to find one: Super Choice Product - Employe Sponsored Fund - Auswide Superannuation Plan

Product Name

Employe Sponsored Fund - Auswide Superannuation Plan

There's another one here: Chinese Heritage of Australian Federation Project=

As the bill was sent to the Council by the Assembly it provides that no Chinese person, whether an employer or employe, shall after January 1, 1905, work or be employed in any factories unless such person holds a license, and no Chinese person so licensed shall transfer or lend his license to any other person.

[Raymott]

Yes, I agree that you've got to be very careful when it comes to using Google as a kind of generalized "corpus". However, I did happent to find one: Super Choice Product - Employe Sponsored Fund - Auswide Superannuation Plan

Product Name

Employe Sponsored Fund - Auswide Superannuation Plan

There's another one here: Chinese Heritage of Australian Federation Project=

As the bill was sent to the Council by the Assembly it provides that no Chinese person, whether an employer or employe, shall after January 1, 1905, work or be employed in any factories unless such person holds a license, and no Chinese person so licensed shall transfer or lend his license to any other person.

Ok, I'll concede that if you go back to 1905, or rely on titles of Funds and Clocks and schemes, then the term has been used in Australia.
But it's what you haven't come up with that is more instructive - a contemporary spelling of 'employee', meaning a worker, as 'employe'.
(Perhaps you probably could, but I think the point's been made).

[PROESL]

Ok, I'll concede that if you go back to 1905, or rely on titles of Funds and Clocks and schemes, then the term has been used in Australia.
But it's what you haven't come up with that is more instructive - a contemporary spelling of 'employee', meaning a worker, as 'employe'.
(Perhaps you probably could, but I think the point's been made).

I only wanted to point out for the benefit of the original poster that the spelling exists and should not be considered incorrect. I know it must not be common because I've never used it and until this discussion had not read it, or could not recall having read it. If I had read it, I probably would have considered it a typing error.

[bhaisahab]

I only wanted to point out for the benefit of the original poster that the spelling exists and should not be considered incorrect. I know it must not be common because I've never used it and until this discussion had not read it, or could not recall having read it. If I had read it, I probably would have considered it a typing error.

If the OP is a student, and if she/he spells it like this 'employe' he/she will be marked wrong and lose points. This is not a spelling which is correct today and should be considered incorrect for the purposes of learning English.

[Abstract Idea]

If the OP is a student, and if she/he spells it like this 'employe' he/she will be marked wrong and lose points. This is not a spelling which is correct today and should be considered incorrect for the purposes of learning English.

Well, this is kind of a complex situation. I guess I agree with bhaisahab concerning teaching.
As an ESL teacher, if a student of mine spells 'employe' I would at first mark it wrong. However if afterwards the student comes to me complaining about the correction, and shows me he did it on purpose, I would gladly give him the points back (after some discussion the subject).

I think something similar might happen with the use of words such as 'nite' or 'thru' instead of 'night' or 'through'.

[PROESL]

If the OP is a student, and if she/he spells it like this 'employe' he/she will be marked wrong and lose points. This is not a spelling which is correct today and should be considered incorrect for the purposes of learning English.

I agree. However, I think the OP originally wanted to know if a such a spelling existed, which is really what I wanted to point out. This was news to me, as I had not heard of this spelling.

The thing is that it may not be used today with any great frequency. However, it apparently is used in some contexts by some people, and it would seem to be on purpose, not by mistake.

I agree that the regular spelling is what one ought to learn. There's no doubt about that. I only wanted to point out that investigation is required before absolutely denying that something does not exist or does exist.

[Abstract Idea]

Oh, OP, I think I have missed that bhaisahab. By the OP you mean the Original Poster ? That is me ? Yes, I am a student.

Well naturally PROESL caught the point. At first I was worried about the correct pronunciation of the word 'employee'. Then, by chance, as you can read through the first posts, we found the alternative spelling 'employe'. Then PROESL kindly researched the usage of that spelling and discussed with other members - a very instructive discussion.

Thanks once more to all participants.

[PROESL]

Oh, OP, I think I have missed that bhaisahab. By the OP you mean the Original Poster ? That is me ? Yes, I am a student.

Well naturally PROESL caught the point. At first I was worried about the correct pronunciation of the word 'employee'. Then, by chance, as you can read through the first posts, we found the alternative spelling 'employe'. Then PROESL kindly researched the usage of that spelling and discussed with other members - a very instructive discussion.

Thanks once more to all participants.

Well, thank you for recognizing that I caught the point. I appreciate that. I'm a well-practiced point catcher.