Nathaniel convened a board vote that afternoon. Cassandra argued for remaining in place to guide the company through the crisis, insisting that her experience made her indispensable. Nathaniel asked how she could restore confidence in processes she had repeatedly overridden. The vote suspended her executive authority pending formal separation, and the directors appointed an interim leader whose first assignment was to cooperate fully with the review and stabilize work that could legally continue.
Preston and Gideon were dismissed after the board concluded that they had participated in the unauthorized sourcing and misrepresentation of material records. Both retained separate attorneys as investigators examined procurement files and communications. Their dismissal did not automatically establish criminal liability, and the company was instructed to avoid making public claims about outcomes no court had reached. Yet the documentary record was enough for the board to decide they could no longer occupy positions of trust.
Laurel submitted her resignation. Nathaniel asked her to reconsider, explaining that the company needed engineers capable of rebuilding the program's damaged systems. She told him she would help investigators understand the technical record, but she could not continue in the same leadership position after acknowledging how long she had stayed silent. She wanted younger engineers to see that admitting a mistake was not the same as escaping its consequences. She left the plant carrying only her personal notebooks and a photograph of her family.
On the floor, many workers heard the decision through an official briefing. Supervisors explained which operations would pause, which contracts could continue, and when employees could expect further information. The announcement did not promise everyone would keep a job; management no longer had the credibility to make promises it could not support. Russell Pike stood among the workers and listened to questions about healthcare, pay, and layoffs, knowing that the economic consequences were real even though the quality warning had also been real.
Mason attended a meeting with an employee advisory group later that week. A younger assembler asked whether he felt proud that his report had brought the company down. The question carried more fear than hostility, and Mason answered without trying to win the room. He said he did not feel proud of anyone losing work and that he wished the first red tag had led to an ordinary corrective action, not a public firing and a failed government audit.
"A safety report didn't put those parts in the aircraft," he said. "The report found what was already there. If we blame the person who brings the problem into daylight, we're asking the next inspector to hide it until somebody gets hurt. I don't want that for any of you."