1

Is it right to say:

1) Have you been working with this company for a very long time?

2) Have you been with this company for a very long time?

Or are there better ways of asking?

Extra: How about "Are you with this company for a long time?" Can I use "are" in this manner?

  • Employees are with the company. Other businesses, contractors work with the company. – SrJoven Nov 10 '14 at 13:17
  • Would it be right to say " Have you been with the company for a long time?" – Bowen Nov 10 '14 at 13:30
  • @SrJoven Are employees the only people 'with the company'? – WS2 Nov 11 '14 at 0:23
  • @WS2 Yes. Unless you have an example otherwise? – SrJoven Nov 11 '14 at 1:32
  • @SrJoven In the UK large numbers of the workforce are contractors, especially in the IT industry. It avoids the rigours of employment law. Some of these 'contractors' have been 'with' the same company for years, but are not legally employees. – WS2 Nov 11 '14 at 8:39
0

Have you been working with this organization for quite a while?

1

The problem with asking a question such as:

Have you been working with this company for a very long time?

or

Have you been with this company for a very long time?

is that you could get an answer such as "Yes" or "No" or "Yes, quite a while actually" that will leave you none the wiser as to how long the person has been associated with the company (in whatever capacity). A question phrased this way:

How long have you been (working) with this company?

should yield a more informative answer.

Update

The answer will also depend on how the person interprets "a very long time". A very long time to one person might be 5 years whereas to another it might be 25.

  • This would have been better informed as a comment, as it didn't answer the question... – DJ Far Nov 10 '14 at 15:36
  • 1
    I beg to differ. The OP asked if there were "better ways of asking" the question and I suggested a way that "should yield a more informative answer". – Frank H. Nov 10 '14 at 18:38
  • The person who answered just yes or no would be ignorant of, or obtusely ignoring the conventions of discourse. – tunny Nov 11 '14 at 13:03
  • 1
    @tunny, good point - I've updated the answer to illustrate that longer answers to the OP's question could be less informative than answers to the rephrased question. – Frank H. Nov 11 '14 at 14:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.