The terms of the offer imply that what ends on the termination date is the worker's employment, not simply the position. Put another way, after the termination date, the employee will no longer be employed. The benefits included in the severance package confirm that a worker's employment must be terminated to receive the package. As discussed above, the benefits defendant offered its employees were offered as a single package. There would be no need to provide those benefits to a worker who continued to be employed in a new position within the company.
Plaintiff advances a final argument.
The difficulty, however, with plaintiff's argument is that she rejected defendant's offer of continuing employment without ever knowing what it entailed. Her own testimony makes clear that the nature of the new position was irrelevant to her decision to leave. Rather, she was pursuing other plans when defendant asked her to stay on in a new position. We agree with the trial court that, on this record, defendant's offer of continuing employment was sufficient. Because defendant did not terminate plaintiff's employment, the trial court correctly held that she was not entitled to the single severance package defendant offered.