The quality of the QF board has been highly questionable for some time. As you've said before, many Australian businesses run efficiently, profitably and below the radar. Why can't Qantas?
Is it because it's a converted government entity? Certainly Telstra, Airservices, Australia Post and some (but by no means all) private airport operators have also been unable to make the transition from government to private without a whole lot of consultants, budget blowouts, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Telstra stays profitable, but given that they still basically control the nation's communications infrastructure you'd be worried if they didn't. Of course ASA and Aus Post are government owned corporations rather than fully public companies, but their employees continually complain about similar issues to those at Qantas.
Having survived Air India and Turkish Airlines I'm no proponent of government owned airlines, but I wonder if the conversion process from OHMS Airlines to Qantas the publiically listed company has caused some of the problems. Its international product competes with companies that are either openly or privately backed by government (such as SQ and EK) or fully competitive commercial products (such as Cathay and Virgin) and its domestic product competes with a new and fully commercial publically listed airline. Qantas sits in the middle with none of the advantages of its government competitors, but none of the flexibillity of the corporate airlines. As a company, it's neither fish nor fowl.
The added complication with Qantas has been its relentless swallowing of smaller carriers, from TAA, Australian, the Qantaslink 'family' (and don't they fight like a family after one too many bottles of wine at a hot summer barbeque
) and Impulse, where they made a half-arssed attempt to absorb more than five separate corporate cultures, company ideologies and groups of staff that weren't neccesarily co-operative. I spent a relatively short time as a Qantas sub-contractor and even ten years after the TAA/QF amalgamation, employees still identified themselves as Qantas or TAA. There had been no effective attempt by the company to meld its disparate sections into one solid company.
In short, if you had half a brain, why the hell would you want to be on the Qantas Board? Even the Chairmans' Club wine list wouldn't be a worthy renumerance.
Anyone with basic aviation knowledge runs a mile.