The reason they're not doing anything is the well known "lazy tax" if you don't advertise and make it hard to achieve, most people will let it slide because it's too hard to chase up. This approach maximises money going into the club, and lets Nat Fyfe keep earning $500,000 per year. Does anyone really care about the 75% who have been stood down?
The socially responsible thing to do would have been to slash players salaries even more, to say 100,000 per year (still very generous for doing SFA imho) and offer (or better yet, give) members a decent refund (say 50%) with an explanation of where the remainder is going eg, to the club to keep the lights on and potentially keeping some dollars going into the hands of the non-playing employees hands.