In Texas Workers' Compensation Insurance Fund v. Del Industrial, Inc, 35 S.W.3d 591, 596, 43 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 589 (Tex. 2000) the Court recognized in that "'the common law has been dramatically engrafted upon by the Legislature. Where the common law is revised by statute, the statute controls.'" In Del, the Court held that the Staff Leasing Services Act could result as a practical matter in a split workforce, meaning that some employees had workers' compensation coverage while others did not. This did not deter the Court from applying the Act as written, even though there was a long common-law history prohibiting a split workforce. The Workers' Compensation Act has express definitions of "employer" and "employee" that should be given effect when applicable, even if that results in an employee's having more than one employer for purposes of workers' compensation. As we have seen, nothing in the Act provides that there must be only one "employer" for workers' compensation purposes. Furthermore, nothing in the common-law decisions of this Court is at odds with the concept that an employee may have two employers for workers' compensation purposes. The Court said in Del Industrial, Inc. that "generally, courts determine whether . . . the subscribing company is the worker's employer under the right-of-control test".