The first being Joyce's 71% pay increase. If the company is battling, how can the "leader" justify any of his claims to move jobs off shore, restructure, etc.
Because he is paid to look after the long term interest of the shareholders, not the staff of today.
Some people are incentivised to grow top line figures etc, and like it or not, some are incentivised to cut out dead wood and the like, effectively shrinking revenues, staff numbers and losing money in the short term.
Its not rocket science but many fail to understand his role is about business, not keeping Australians employed in a dying company.
(Sorry of I am not supposed to post here but it does amaze me how many times this misunderstanding is raised in circumstances such as these.)