What I'm saying is that it isn't clear from the article whether there were explicit efforts to catch her up on the surely significant changes that had happened over six months and whether that was the purpose of the PIP program, which it also doesn't explain.
If they had taken away her responsibilities and diminished her role as a result of this leave, then that would be incredibly shitty and she would very justifiable have reason to sue.
But it's not clear that that's what happened. The company could very well have been trying to re-onboard her. We have half the story.
If it weren't the case, Amazon should stand front and center to disarm it. I'm rather surprised that a company that has treated me exceptionally as a customer is not as concerned with repairing its rep as an employer as it seems to be.