Or maybe he’s reporting to meta?
"Poaching" a thing implies that a thing is owned and was unjustly taken.
Humans are employed, not owned. An employer<->employee relationship requires both parties to continue. If an employee breaks this relationship and makes a new one with another employer, there is no theft.
So why do we use the word "poach"? It does not convey what occurred!
My injection into the thread was to query whether a term having been used for a long time is reason enough to continue to use the word "poached" with its associated connotations. We have plenty of other words to use.
Goodness gracious!
For example, I could call you a nitpicker. Are you picking nits? No.
Are you being conscientious? Paying attention to detail? Sure.
Which word would you want me to label you with?
As an employee do I want to be poached? No. I want to be approached, reasoned with, and make my own choices no matter what either employer "feels" about the situation.