A Severance Offer Refers to Your Old Agreement: Read the Documents Together

If a severance offer says your old employment agreement remains in force, obtain that agreement before evaluating the offer. The new release may contain only part of the restrictions you are being asked to accept. Definitions, exceptions and obligations in an older document can change how the new packet operates.

The adopted decision in NTT Data Americas, Inc. illustrates this problem. The Board’s January 16, 2026 order adopted an earlier judge’s clause-by-clause review of an exit packet that incorporated a prior employment agreement. This guide addresses how to assemble and read the combined documents, rather than repeat our California separation-agreement speech guide.

Follow every reference to another document

Mark each phrase that preserves an earlier obligation or incorporates another agreement. Record the document’s title, date and section number. Ask for a copy if it is missing. A link to a current handbook may not establish what an employee signed years earlier.

Include amendments, restrictive-covenant agreements, benefit guides and attachments delivered with the offer. In NTT Data, the review extended beyond the new release to compensation confidentiality in the earlier agreement and confidentiality footers on termination guides. Those were separate restrictions, even though they arrived as one exit package.

Map the conduct each clause regulates

For every restriction, identify what information it covers, whom you may speak to, whether permission or advance notice is required and what happens after an alleged breach. Keep disclosure of pay or working conditions separate from trade secrets, company property and the amount of new severance consideration.

For example, a clause allowing you to contact an agency may sit beside another clause requiring notice to the employer before responding to legal process. Counsel needs both sentences to assess whether the promised exception actually addresses the restriction. A heading such as “saved rights” does not explain how conflicting language fits together.

Read releases and cooperation duties separately

A release of your own claims, a restriction on assisting coworkers and a promise to meet company counsel concern different conduct. Identify whether the release addresses claims brought for others or recovery through an agency proceeding. Then find any continuing cooperation requirement and whether participation is described as voluntary.

The judge in NTT Data examined those particular provisions under the federal labor standards applied in that case. The analysis also rejected some alleged violations involving other clauses. Keep each challenged term tied to the legal theory actually considered; a ruling under the National Labor Relations Act does not establish whether every covenant is enforceable under California contract law.

Separate the proposed restriction from a loss it caused

If a restriction was enforced, preserve the demand, threatened consequence, payment withheld or other action. If you declined an offer, retain the offer and your response. Do not infer that a finding about an unlawful term necessarily establishes a particular dollar loss.

In NTT Data, the record did not prove the financial harm needed for the requested expanded remedy or justify requiring new offers to workers who had declined severance. That is a reason to identify the evidence of actual loss separately from the wording being challenged.

Resolve missing documents before the decision deadline

Bring counsel the complete packet, earlier agreements, delivery email, revisions and stated signing deadline. Ask which documents survive signing, which terms conflict and what a proposed revision would change. Preserve the original versions rather than editing the only copy.

Eligibility for federal labor protections and the rules governing a particular separation require individual review. Keep any external claim deadlines separate from the offer’s response date. Our case analysis identifies the clauses and actual remedy in the adopted decision.