While Gani may not have a full grasp of all the facts, the rebuttal by the company was long-winded yet did not address several points of Gani, which makes it suspicious. That they had to scrap the bottom to mention the family outing to justify that they were pro-employee shows that they have something to hide.
The management was fumbling through-and-through and despite being well-paid staff had no idea of simple company policy and were giving him different answers. The reasons for the termination were also not valid and letting him go without any compensation was a full stretch of labour laws. Stating that he did not go to the management on his personal problems were off-tangent as they could not even give him an answer on his AWS.
Lastly, there is no indication of Gilbert making any conclusion but to forward the letter to MOM and render assistance to the man. The pro-PAP toddler accusing him of making a conclusion is by itself a false immature conclusion.