The directors also had to consider continuity.
An airline couldn't simply stop functioning because its CEO was removed.
Thousands of employees needed clear reporting lines.
Regulatory responsibilities had to remain assigned.
And daily operations required experienced leadership.
Maya listened carefully.
Then asked Daniel to proceed.
The independent investigator presented the findings.
The report described repeated deficiencies in complaint handling, pressure on employees to produce favorable outcomes, failures to preserve certain records properly, and evidence that senior management received warnings that weren't addressed adequately.
Several findings involved Adrian's office directly.
There were communications instructing managers to avoid creating documentation that might generate adverse publicity.
Other messages suggested that complaints should be characterized as isolated customer dissatisfaction unless a problem became impossible to dismiss.
The investigator emphasized that not every instance of poor service was attributable to the CEO.
But the pattern involved policies, incentives, and management responses that senior leadership had the authority and responsibility to correct.
The board listened.
Then the investigator addressed the newest evidence.
The passenger advisory concerning Seat 12A.
One director leaned forward.
"Was this advisory standard practice?"
The investigator shook her head.
"Not in the form used here."
She explained that airlines had legitimate reasons to communicate passenger information when special assistance, security concerns, or operational requirements existed.
But the message about Maya lacked a documented basis.
It described her as a potentially difficult passenger before any conduct issue occurred.
And the communications traced back to people associated with the CEO's office.
Another director asked whether Adrian personally instructed the crew to mistreat her.
The investigator answered carefully.
"No evidence presently establishes that he ordered the food incident."
Maya nodded.
She appreciated the precision.
The investigator continued.
"However, the available communications support a concern that senior management sought to create or encourage negative reporting about the chairwoman's travel."
A third director frowned.
"Why?"
The investigator looked toward the documents.
"That question is part of the continuing inquiry. The timing of the advisory, its connection to the emergency board meeting, and the absence of any genuine passenger-conduct basis are significant."
For a moment, the room became quiet.
Then Maya spoke.
"I want to be clear about something."
The directors turned toward her.
She continued.
"Whatever happened to me today should be investigated independently. I don't want the board to treat my personal experience as a substitute for the report we've been reviewing for months."
Several directors nodded.
Maya took a breath.
"But I also don't want us to pretend the incident is unrelated to the management culture described in that report."
The board chair's voice remained steady.