Great points you lay out for the legal side Johnik-- and one could argue to some success, but was not looking to judge what was being offered based solely on what little we know/are being led to believe... not my gig
I was responding to the timeline and offering a natural human reaction perspective conceding the legal speculation. I do believe it is silly to expect that a soon-to-be-let-go employee would not attempt to set themselves up to continue to draw a paycheck from somewhere outside of their soon-to-be-terminated employment. We do not know what transpired in an assumed induced, stressed environment after Jul 14/15. Indeed there are a lot of plausible-s including Mr Kaplanis coming to an understanding that perhaps his "severance" package was in jeopardy.
To note: there is a provision in the unsigned agreement where outside work is acceptable/possible, but again not a point to make a definitive conclusion.
I also find it sad that posts are willing to judge one side so easily and yet complain if the other is challenged-- can we not recognize the insincerity of the "whole" discussion under these conditions? I choose to not pre-judge either...
again for me the importance of the litigation is what is revealed outside the legal issues being argued.
But as to your post, very well constructed (as usual)-- points taken :-)