In theory. But are all employees female?
Why do you ask?
I think that the "ee" suffix denotes relationship, not sex/gender.
It does now, but the word derives from the feminine form of the French
employé, so if the masseur/-euse distinction is to be made in English, why should it not apply in the case of an employee?
But in reality I was being flippant: the answer is simply that English provides no adequate way to distinguish between
employ and
employe, so using the feminine form and pronouncing it
ee is the next best solution. Bah goom.
It's amusing to note, though, that while PC has done its best to eliminate gender-linked versions of nouns, e.g. waitresses and waiters must now become waitpersons or something of the kind (service professionals?
), the masculine and feminine versions of
masseur waltz happily on, presumably because of the louche associations some attach to
masseuse.