InvidiaRed

@Desiderius Price has a point. The editor needs to focus on the elements of the story, rather than act as a proofreader. If you don’t want to do an editing pass, have someone who’s good at it beta-read for you, and listen to them. 

I rely on my editor for things like making sure I haven’t screwed up the chronology between events and chapters, haven’t left some dangling threads or gaping plot holes, and that my characters won’t cause the average reader to think they’ve stumbled into the literary equivalent of Madame Tussaud’s. My editor also watches for repetitive phrasing, run-on sentences, and other abominations against the language. We both rely on the proofreader to catch any spelling or grammar mistakes we missed (damn those homophones!) and to keep an eye out for anything else that rings false on a clean read-through. But first and foremost, it’s my job to turn over a manuscript that I’ve read, re-read, proofread, spell-checked, grammar-checked, and cleaned up to the best of my ability. If I piss off my editor by being sloppy, or lazy, you can bet the publisher is going to be less willing to take another manuscript from me. Authors are a dime a dozen; good editors are rare, and therefore precious. 

I’m grossly simplifying of course, but at if you want to be an author you do need at lest a couple pair of eyes to catch what you can’t.

my editor was well compensated and tipped in gratitude.

I always try to respect the hired help, because they’re people too.  (Good plan in life, TBH.)