Stop calling it "poaching"

Should be (2016).

Color me surprised - a poaching company doesn't like people using the term "poaching"?

As commenter David Carson points out on that page, people use "poaching" to refer "a company making an offer to an employee of another company that they currently have a business relationship with. Customers hiring staff away from suppliers, and vice versa, etc."

There's a related definition which I think is more common. Quoting Wiktionary, "To cause an employee or customer to switch from a competing company to your own company." Quoting from Merrian-Webster, "to attract (someone, such as an employee or customer) away from a competitor."

In neither case does the term have the meaning of hiring people for a higher salary.

The essay says "Did you know that the roots of Silicon Valley can be traced back to one of the most epic “poaching” events of all time?", referring to the 'traitorous eight' who left Shockley to found Fairchild.

This was not poaching. It doesn't even fit the author's own definition, which is "one company offering an employee of another company a better job". Those who left Shockley were founders; Fairchild didn't exist to make them an offer.

And if the company is serious about not using "poach" as metaphor, they should stop using "hunt" as a metaphor for finding employees. Eg,

* "many companies try to hunt the same developers" - https://42hire.com/how-to-attract-and-select-the-best-progra...

* "When you are engaged in talent acquisition and on the hunt for your next talent" - https://42hire.com/top-secrets-to-become-the-best-recruitmen...

* "Permanently rotate people and hire new MBAs to hunt employees with analytics skills." - https://42hire.com/digital-hr-tips-to-update-the-recruitment...

This 'hunt' metaphor equally compares you to Cecil the lion.