In this case I think I’d take BoingBoing’s post with a grain of salt.
The linked article at the Mirror doesn’t say anything about regular direct deposits that I can see, nor does this article at The Scarborough News. Those articles read to me more like it could have been payment for some one-time work done on a contract basis, rather than payment to an employee on payroll.
And while BB says “the director of the company he works for” (which seems like that could be the President or CEO), the two articles don’t say it quite that way, and they read, to me, as though “director” could easily refer to a director of bookkeeping or some such.
Well, that’s my two cents, anyway (or should I say “tuppence” in this case? 
)
