[salmonlogs]

There are some SIGNIFICANT downsides as an employee to using an employer of record. It's another example of companies reducing employee rights and outsourcing risk and responsibiility.

1 - No equity. The legal company structure prevents you getting equity in the company.

2 - Significantly reduced employment rights. During the current waves of layoffs people employed through these type of arrangements found they had significantly less rights than normal employees, primarily due to fewer people being employed this way did not meet the usual thresholds for redundancy planning and payouts.

A friend of mine employed through an employer of record was "made redundant" and was offered exactly zero notice, severance or payout. When he tried to negotiate they effectively told him to sue them, knowing it will take significant time and legal costs to bring forward a claim.

[danuker]

In many jurisdictions you don't even need to sue; you can file a complaint with the labor board.

[em-bee]

which is no different from any international remote work. employee protection does not work across borders unless there are specific arrangements involved (like within the EU).