plan.” Lake v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 73 F.3d 1372, 1379 (6th Cir.1996). The district court found that no plausible reading of this particular plan’s definition of “release” supports plaintiffs’ claims for severance benefits. We agree. A. Lack of Work The plain meaning of “lack of work” does not encompass plaintiffs’ situation. The plaintiffs are presently doing the same or substantially similar work as they did for ANSI before the asset sale. The transfer of employment from ANSI to Cargill was not caused by a lack of work at ANSI, but rather by the sale of all of ANSI’s assets to Cargill. This common sense reading is consistent with the common sense we and sister circuits have applied in other cases. See Garavuso v. Shoe Corps. of Am. Indus., Inc., 709 F.Supp. 1423 (S.D.Ohio) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 892 F.2d 79 (6th Cir.1989); Headrick
holding that employees who continued at a comparable job with a successor company had not been permanently terminated or laid off by the company due to lack of work holding that a limited liability company is a citizen of any state of which a member of the company is a citizen holding that a company exercising substantial control of the terms and conditions of the work of the employees is an employer under the flsa holding owner of company qualified as an employer due to inter alia his authority to hire and fire employees and overall financial control of company holding that an employee could not be bound to an arbitration agreement that had been mailed to him by his employer acceptance of which was indicated by employees continued tenure with the company where there was no evidence in the record that the employee had received read or understood the document