A and C were the only reasons her firing was noteworthy, which caused completely ordinary behaviour from the team following her firing, i.e., not answering questions or deliberately releasing information about it, to be construed as a "veil of secrecy."
They might have had all their ducks in a row. The problem is that the team needs to give her enough time to get independent legal advice before she signs the separation agreement, otherwise it could be set aside.
It should be phrased something more along the lines of "she is no longer with the organization"
Appropriate strategy to follow for *EVERYONE* to follow if your employer gives you a document to sign when they terminate you. Tell them you'll sign it once you get your "lawyer" (or somebody with some expertise in the manner) to look it over. Don't automatically sign it until you at the very least take a VERY good look at it.
Media and fans are going to find out in this market.
It’s been quite underwhelming so far with the new management team. Nothing was really addressed.
What was she hired to do? What was she not doing (that she was hired to do) that got her fired?
Couldnt have been tough with the Canucks considering this was the only other person in the room:
The funny part is the folks complaining about this also praised the previous regime almost to the end.
