Is Act of Remuneration intended to cover acts of compensating contractors?

[gregfowlerphd]

I hope so, because I'd like to use it that way. (I'd also assume so, since that fits the standard use of "remuneration".) However, if it is, I think there's a problem with the current definition:

An Act of Purchasing wherein a Financial Instrument is used by an Agent (the Employer) to compensate another Agent (the Employee) for the services they perform for the Employer.

The problem is that the definition restricts acts of remuneration to acts occurring in the context of an employment relationship, and CCO elsewhere distinguishes sharply between employment relationships and contractee/contractor relationships (see the scope note for Contractor Role).

[BrendaBraitling]

@gregfowlerphd
I had to look this up, but I believe the definition is accurate as stated.
I am not a professional ontologist, but have decades of experience in dealing with contracts and regulatory compliance... Remuneration seems to have a general "dictionary" definition of payment or compensation - which adds to the confusion. However, in general use - in the world of business, regulation and taxation - it seems to require an Employer- Employee relationship and refers to compensation received by the Employee - for Human Labor as a Person - from the Employer. See some links/excerpts below.

Contractors are party to an Agreement and are compensated based upon the terms of the Agreement alone. In the real world, it is handled as a business-to-business (or party-to-party) interaction. Some tax regulations, contractual terms or grant stipulations require the contractor to handle payments to Person/Humans for "Acts of Human Labor" in a specified manner. So a Contractor seems to not be a "Person" at all, but is a business organization which is paid according to a contract and then carries out its own payment of Persons.

As an aside... I am a little concerned about the term "purchasing" because employment is an internal activity within an organization. Purchasing is usually a business activity that is external to an organization. Very different for accounting purposes... And - I personally feel that employees are compensated (paid) for services rendered and not purchased....🤔

Investopedia
"What Is Remuneration?
Remuneration is the total compensation received by an employee including base salary, bonuses, commission payments, overtime pay, and any other monetary benefits that the employee receives...

UN - International Labour Organization 1951
" Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951: Article 1
For the purpose of this Convention--
(a) the term remuneration includes the ordinary, basic or minimum wage or salary and any additional emoluments whatsoever payable directly or indirectly, whether in cash or in kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of the worker's employment;

[gregfowlerphd]

@BrendaBraitling: Thanks for the reply, Brenda! A few thoughts:

• I'm certainly happy to defer to your experience in this area, particularly given the links you provided. However, if CCO's use of 'remuneration' is meant to capture the way that term is used in a business context rather than its "dictionary definition", I'm inclined to think it would be helpful to add a rdfs:comment specifying this.
• The Wikipedia entry CCO cites as its definition source for Act of Remuneration does specify that such an act must occur in the context of an employment relationship. However, that Wikipedia entry itself cites this webpage, where the definitions given also cover acts of compensating contractors. So I'm inclined to think the Wikipedia entry isn't a good definition source if the intent is to capture the "business context" use of 'remuneration'. (That said, there has been some discussion on here about moving away from Wikipedia as a definition source, so this bullet point might soon be rendered moot.)
• I think Act of Purchasing, as it's defined in CCO, does cover employee compensation. It might be worth considering whether that definition should be modified in light of your point, however.