Do not assume it does. Identify the actual work, location, employer and status; the qualifying employment calculation requires individual assessment.
Keep status and work history distinct
Qualifying L spouses may be employment authorized incident to status with appropriate documentation, but work permission does not by itself establish the principal applicant’s required foreign employment. Assess the actual history and each person’s current plans separately. Two records are being confused here, and they belong to two different people acting in two different capacities.
Time spent in a dependent status is a fact about that person's status; qualifying foreign employment is a fact about work performed for the organisation that will petition. The same months can be both, one, or neither, and only the actual employer, duties and location settle which. Ask who employed the applicant during that period, who directed the work, and where it was physically performed, then have those answers assessed rather than inferring eligibility from the status held.
The spouse's own permissions run on a separate track: a qualifying L spouse may be employment authorized incident to status with appropriate documentation, but that authorization says nothing about whether the principal's foreign year is made out. Hypothetical example: a landscape designer accompanies a spouse abroad and continues remote work for the same employer, and it is that employment, rather than the accompaniment, that the adviser assesses.