I have a feeling you are not talking about the level and training of staff that the first reply to your posting mentioned.
At the moment I have stopped taking on people, the hassles outweighed the advantages.
Petting them on the books, getting employers liability and paying them a set rate did not work for me. I took them on, on a self employed basis, ensured they had public liability insurance and paid them 50% of whatever they turned over, in fact they actually took their money at source so to speak, this way the only money I saw was my 50%
The same would apply whetner they were working by my side or working by themselves, when I considered them well enough trained they would always be by themselves.
I have found that young guys who do not have the millstone of a mortgage around their necks worked out best.
The work they were doing was almost all domestic acoidiots, the 50% was enough to motivate them, give them more and you simply don't make enough out of it for it to be worth doing, less and it simply isn't enough to make it worthwhile for them to do it.
If you are doing a lot of large contracts and commercial work then paying them 50% would be far too high and also a little difficult to work out.
I am self employed and I don't get holiday pay, as they are self employed, neither do they. Holiday pay is considered by all as part of the job, not by me, it is a fabulous perk. To be paid and not have to work? boy would I like some of that
The same with regards sickness, when you employ someone on the books and incorperate all of these things and you are only a one man band just growing past the point of having more work than you can get around by yourself, these things are all way too expensive, unless of course you have the sort of contracts that pay well enough to cover all these costs.
It can take a long time though to find someone who will stay the course. I have recruited from the job centre and also out the local paper, word of mouth also worked.
Ian