The spouse’s permission depends on individual status and documentation, not similarity of skills or the principal’s technical role. Contrast the spouse's position with the principal's instead of reading across from it. The principal's authorization flows from the petition; a qualifying spouse's flows from status together with the appropriate documentation, and the two rest on separate records carrying separate expiry dates.
Check the proposed work independently
Qualifying L spouses are employment authorized incident to status, with appropriate evidence. L dependent children do not gain that permission solely through their status. Describe intended employment, including remote work, and verify the relevant individual requirements.
Remote work deserves its own comparison, because assumptions about it go wrong in both directions. Working from a United States address for a Canadian employer is neither automatically outside what a given status permits nor automatically within it; the answer turns on that person's own status and the terms attached to it, and the actual arrangement should be described to counsel rather than summarised. Where a spouse holds skills the same employer needs, resist the tidy solution of adding that spouse to the company payroll without separate analysis, since a convenient arrangement built on the wrong permission is harder to unwind than a delayed start.
Check every admission record for its own expiry before planning around any of this.