Employed With/By

[EverLivingPoet]

"He is employed with/by a certain company."

Any difference between "employed by" and "employed with"?

 

[VeroHerrera]

Hi EverLivingPoet,

Both are correct. "With" is more informal, and gives the idea of collaboration between employees and companies.

Hope it helps,
Vero

 

[emsr2d2]

"He is employed with/by a certain company."

Any difference between "employed by" and "employed with"?

There may be a BrE/AmE divide here, but I wouldn't use "to be employed with" when talking about a workplace.

He is employed by Burger King.
He works at Burger King.
He is employed, with a friend, at the local Burger King.

He has taken employment with Burger King.

 

[Leandro-Z]

Sorry VeroHerrera, but your statement is incorrect. There is a big difference between To be employed by and to be employed with.

To be employed by means that someone gave the employment to you. It`s passive voice and therefore you use "by" (e.g. Stephen's father employed me last week= I was employed by Stephen's father last week).

To be employed with, as emsr2d2 said, gives you the impression that you got the employment at the same time another person did so. Thus, you can notice an enormous difference between both expressions. The preposition "with" can be used in other ways to express the same, but it definitely cannot replace "by" in that sentence.

 

[Rover_KE]

No Teacher

I like "employed with".

Native speakers like 'employed by.'

Rover

 

[Rover_KE]

I'm not a teacher. I hear "employed with", but I don't hear "employed by".

Native speakers say 'employed by'.

Always capitalise I.

Rover

 

[riquecohen]

There may be a BrE/AmE divide here, but I wouldn't use "to be employed with" when talking about a workplace.

He is employed by Burger King.
He works at Burger King.
He is employed, with a friend, at the local Burger King.

He has taken employment with Burger King.

There's no divide at all here. It's the same in AmE.