None of this makes any sense. You have it backwards.
MacInnis most definitely voted "for" the merger, as were the other outgoing members.
Secondly, how is the CEO "out for his golden parachute" when he consistently voted *against* the merger? If he were "out for his golden parachute" he would have been voting *for* the merger. And that aside, what has management done to need cleanup? This whole thing happened because of activist shareholders on the BOARD.
As a further aside, I certainly understand skepticism about the C-suite or the executives of large companies or whatever... and you can say I'm biased if you like... but I do know this -- Alan (CEO) cares deeply about Williams (he's worked here his entire career), its employees and -- yes -- the Tulsa community. That's probably why he fought so hard against the merger.
Point being -- any vitriol about this whole thing should be pointed directly at the Board... and specifically those outgoing members who were the ones pushing for this unnecessary and pointless merger.
What Jeff said. ^