And therein lies the issue. Ultimately the board set the direction and strategic policy and bring in a CEO who can sell it to everyone else, but also be the fall guy when it all goes wrong (planned or otherwise).
Take for instance our friends at Rio Tinto. 12 months ago Tom Albanese had to fall on his sword for the write downs that occurred due to some poor decision making/deteriorating market conditions etc. no one from the board though met the same fate. Why? Because the board were happy to let Tom take the company forward into some otherwise ill timed and I'll defined deals in places they may not have necessarily wanted to do business in. They signed off on it so should have ultimately faced the same bullet (and I'm not a fan of TA by any stretch of the imagination.
Come back to QF.
The board have set their course for what they want to happen and are using BGA (again, not a fan) to complete the job and be the public face. End result, BGA leaves with his pockets lined and pants intact, board gets what it wants with its pockets lined and pants intact and the staff end up with empty pockets and pants ripped to the ground in perpetuation for the largest shafting that many will ever receive.
Make no mistake, QF will continue to exist in the future but it will be a very different business to what it is now, to the detriment of its employees, the Australian people and government, its current shareholders and its passengers.