Thread regarding Thomson Reuters layoffs

@1zcm+196hdFOe : one of the main issues here is that it would appear that some of those being RIF'd are not confined to being "near" retirement age. I can't speak to the ages of those being laid off for the company as a whole, but in my particular area the majority of those laid off over the past decade have been aged 50+, and not all of them were within a year of two of retirement. Though some were on high salaries, most were probably at the lower end of the salary scale. It is also interesting to note that some of the posts here over the past 18 months or so have also made similar comments. This begs the question, how many of those people RIF'd to date actually asked TR for the grounds or selection criteria as to why they were selected to be RIF'd? In my opinion, it is imperative that people ask this question when they are told their jobs no longer exist. Why rollover and just accept it, unless of course, they hate the place so much they just want to leave.

If a layoff is possible, I fear that they will try to let go without severance aka "terminate" at will. Severance is not guaranteed. Its a gamble. I think the case with most is, too young to retire, but too old to easily find another job.

I agree. There at least used to be job security before it became Thomson Reuters. My advice if you are near retirement age is as you say do your job but don’t knock yourself out working late hours or on the weekends. Wait for them to lay you off (which eventually they will). If you are younger go on every interview you can get but most companies are not much different than TR.