Amcor is a listed company and Russell Jones was an employee, albeit the CEO. He resigned, but effectively it was "resign or be sacked" and his reputation was seriously damaged. As far as I am aware, he has been unable to get another job - I certainly have not seen any reports about him in Australian corporate life. So his life has been ruined by what he did.
What about Pratt? He continued to run Visy despite the illegal cartel ripping $1.5b off average Australians. Any other person would have been sacked. Why wasn't Pratt? Obviously because he owns the company and was not going to sack himself. You imply that Pratt had his reputation dragged through the gutter. As far as I am aware, all the accusations made against him have been proved to be true. I am not sure how printing the truth is dragging someone's reputation through the gutter. I would only apply this expression to someone who has been falsely accused of something.
Pratt and Visy explicitly broke the law - there was no grey line. There were meetings to fix prices, markets etc - clear cartel behaviour. If the behaviour also goes on in other companies, this is also illegal, but the fact that these other companies have not been found out does not make Pratt's behaviour any less illegal or immoral. Is a murderer any less guilty because other murderers are not caught?
IMHO, it is dissapointing that proceeds of crime legislation can not be used to recover the proceeds from the family who reaped the gains of the illegal behaviour.
