It makes sense to reconsider the use of that word given that employers competing on wages and benefits does benefit the employees.
- Finding a small zoo
- Deliberately bankrupting them
- Buying their animals cheap and slaughtering them
In my mind Poaching equates to using illegal or unethical means to hunt animals. Bankrupting a zoo to rid the animals of their protection feels like that to me.
[1] https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2023482-5-milwaukee-buck...
'Patrick Meade, a senior engineer at Star Theory, said he turned down the job offer from Take-Two. He declined to discuss the events in detail but said he didn’t want to work for a big company where he wouldn’t have the same degree of influence or financial benefits if the game were a hit. “I was at a small studio, where the work I did had a massive impact on our success,” Meade said. “When I see myself at any large corporation, that is fundamentally not true."'
It's not all about wages. (But even if it were, notice that he chose not to take the offer because of the lesser profit sharing. So it's not just a net win, even for those that did take the offer.)