Thanks for the feedback, @badesemowo. You raise a valid point regarding the Tech Nation guide’s default stance on contractors, but I’d like to clarify why this employment structure shouldn’t be an automatic disqualifier.
In my region, it is standard practice for highly skilled software and DevOps engineers to be employed by international companies through platforms like Upwork or remote recruitment agencies. Because of cross-border legalities and cost optimization for the employer, the system practically requires us to set up personal companies and issue B2B invoices for our work, while taxes are handled accordingly. While it looks like a “contractor” agreement on paper, the day-to-day reality is full-time, dedicated employment rather than casual, short-term gig freelancing.
There is also clear precedent for Tech Nation recognizing this distinction. In another case on this forum (thread 6020), an applicant was initially rejected under the assumption that she was just a “freelance contractor.” However, after she appealed and explained the true nature of her engagement, the reviewers reversed that specific decision and officially recognized her as a full-time employee, acknowledging that her working model was practically full-time employment despite the legal freelance structure.
My contracts and invoicing history reflect a sustained, long-term commitment and a significant, product-level impact, proving that I am acting as a dedicated in-house engineer. I plan to clearly articulate this distinction in my application so the reviewers understand that this is a full-time employment model disguised as a contracting arrangement due to local business realities.