MoineauWorld.com – Where Cooking Meets Tech & Everything Between

Tag: K-shaped recovery

The Era of Forever Layoffs in 2025 | Analysis by Brian Moineau

Posted on by Brian Moineau

A slow bleed: 1.1 million layoffs and the rise of “forever layoffs”

The economy is sending mixed signals: corporate profits and soaring stock indexes on one hand, and a steady trickle of pink slips on the other. In 2025, U.S. employers announced roughly 1.17 million job cuts through November — the most since the pandemic year and a level you have to go back to 2009 to match. That “drip, drip” pattern isn't just a statistical quirk; it’s remaking how people experience work and how companies manage labor. (fortune.com)

What’s new: forever layoffs explained

  • “Forever layoffs” describe frequent, small-scale reductions — dozens instead of thousands — that recur throughout the year rather than one headline-grabbing mass layoff. Glassdoor says these rolling cuts now account for a growing share of corporate reductions and have shifted the emotional tenor at work from shock to chronic unease. (fortune.com)
  • Challenger, Gray & Christmas counted about 1,170,821 announced job cuts through November 2025, a 54% increase from the same period in 2024. November’s announced cuts were 71,321, down sharply from October but still historically elevated for the month. (reuters.com)

Why this matters now

  • Psychological effect: small, repeated cuts keep employees anxious in a way a one-time event doesn’t. Glassdoor’s analysis suggests mentions of “layoffs” and “job insecurity” in company reviews are higher now than in March 2020. That sustained anxiety corrodes morale and productivity. (fortune.com)
  • Structural shift: companies are leaning into automation and AI and reorganizing around tools that require fewer people for the same work. Challenger and Glassdoor data show AI and restructuring are explicit drivers of many cuts. (reuters.com)
  • Labor market disconnect: hiring plans through November were the weakest since 2010, with employers announcing far fewer planned hires than layoffs — a recipe for “jobless growth” and weak labor mobility. (fortune.com)

The context: not just tech, not just one sector

  • Technology remains among the hardest-hit private industries, but telecom, retail, food processing, nonprofits, media, and small businesses have all trimmed staff in 2025. The pattern is broad-based, meaning the risk of churn exists in many workplaces. (fortune.com)
  • Federal datasets such as JOLTS suggest the raw count of people separated from jobs may be even higher than announced cuts, underscoring the gap between announced plans and actual labor-market churn. Glassdoor cited JOLTS in noting about 1.7 million separations over the same window, a reminder that announced cuts are a partial view. (fortune.com)

Who wins, who loses

  • Winners: Large firms with balance sheets, scale, and access to capital can restructure without immediate pain and can adopt automation to protect margins. Investors can celebrate efficiency; boards may pat themselves on the back. (fortune.com)
  • Losers: Workers — especially early-career and white-collar employees who once counted on steady upward mobility — face career uncertainty, fewer entry-level roles, and tougher bargaining power. Small businesses, with thin margins, are also vulnerable and have been shedding jobs in aggregate. (fortune.com)

Economic and social implications

  • A K-shaped recovery becomes more entrenched: high earners continue spending while lower-income households pull back, widening inequality and concentrating demand among a narrower consumer group. (fortune.com)
  • Consumer confidence and spending patterns may fragment: if many workers live with chronic job insecurity, durable spending and housing decisions will be delayed — a drag on growth that’s hard to capture in headline GDP figures. (fortune.com)
  • Political pressure grows: sustained layoffs and weak hiring invite policy debates about unemployment insurance, retraining, AI regulation, and labor protections — issues already emerging in 2025 discussions. (reuters.com)

Practical signals to watch in the coming months

  • Hiring plans vs. announced cuts: if the gap narrows because hiring picks up, the worst of the labor-market anxiety may ease. If cuts continue to outpace hires, the “forever” trend is likely to persist. (reuters.com)
  • Sectoral shifts: watch how many announced layoffs explicitly cite AI or automation. That will tell us whether the job losses are cyclical or structural. (reuters.com)
  • Small business payrolls: ADP’s November data showed small businesses bore most November private-sector losses; continued weakness here suggests consumer-facing parts of the economy could weaken further. (fortune.com)

My take

We’re living through a recalibration of corporate labor strategy. The 1.17 million announced cuts through November 2025 are a headline number — but the real story is how layoffs are being delivered: quietly, repeatedly, and often in ways that avoid the reputational cost of mass firings. That makes the phenomenon harder to measure with a single statistic and more corrosive to worker confidence. For policymakers and leaders who care about sustainable growth, the policy challenge is twofold: soften the human cost (through better transitions, training, and safety nets) and shape incentives so investments in people aren’t replaced wholesale by automation that concentrates gains at the top.

Final thoughts

If this pattern holds, we won’t remember 2025 simply as a year of layoffs; we’ll remember it as the year the employment contract changed. The task ahead is to decide whether that change will become a grinding permanent norm or a painful but short-lived rebalancing. Either way, the millions affected this year deserve policies, corporate practices, and community responses that treat transitions as human — not just accounting — problems. (fortune.com)

Sources

K‑Shaped Recovery: Winners and Losers | Analysis by Brian Moineau

Posted on by Brian Moineau

Why everyone’s talking about the “K‑shaped” economy — and why it should make you think twice

You’ve probably heard the phrase “K‑shaped recovery” a few times lately — and not just from economists. It’s showing up in corporate earnings calls, news headlines, and even at kitchen‑table conversations. The image is simple: a K, with one arm shooting up and the other slumping down. But the real story behind that picture is messy, emotional, and getting more relevant to daily life than many of us expected.

What the K really means

  • The upper arm of the K represents higher‑income households: incomes, asset values and spending are rising for people who own lots of stocks, real estate or high‑paying jobs tied to tech and finance.
  • The lower arm represents lower‑ and middle‑income households: wage growth is weak, price pressure (rent, groceries, energy) bites harder, and many people have less ability to spend or save.
  • The result: headline GDP and stock indices can look healthy while large swaths of Americans feel stuck or squeezed.

This isn’t a new concept — economists used “K‑shaped” during the pandemic to describe divergent recoveries. What’s changed is how sharply the split has re‑emerged in 2025 as asset prices and AI‑sector gains lift wealth at the top while pay and hiring cool off for lower‑wage workers.

How we got here: context that matters

  • Pandemic-era policies, huge fiscal responses, shifting labor markets and record‑high tech valuations created a period where asset owners got a disproportionate share of the gains.
  • In 2023–24 some lower‑wage workers saw real wage improvements, narrowing the gap briefly — but that momentum faded in 2025 as inflation‑adjusted wage growth slowed more for the bottom quartile than for the top.
  • The AI boom and heavy corporate investment in data centers and infrastructure have powered big gains for a few companies (and their shareholders) without producing broad wage gains or mass hiring in many sectors.
  • Consumer spending overall continues, but a growing share comes from higher‑income households; lower‑income spending lags, which reshuffles which businesses win and which struggle.

Who’s winning and who’s losing

  • Winners:
    • Households that own stocks and other financial assets. The stock market and gains tied to the AI winners have boosted wealth for the top slice of Americans.
    • Companies that sell premium goods and services to affluent buyers. Luxury retail and high‑end travel show resilience even when mass‑market demand softens.
  • Losers:
    • Lower‑wage workers in retail, hospitality and entry‑level services where hiring and pay growth have cooled.
    • Businesses that rely on broad, volume‑based spending by younger and lower‑income consumers (certain fast‑casual restaurants, budget retailers, travel tailored to younger demographics).

Why this pattern matters beyond headlines

  • Fragile consumer demand: If lower‑ and middle‑income households pull back sharply, overall spending — and corporate revenue — could fall, potentially causing a feedback loop that hits hiring and investment.
  • Policy risks: If policymakers respond by cutting rates or changing tax rules to stoke growth, the effects may again flow unevenly and could widen the gap unless targeted measures accompany them.
  • Social and political consequences: Persistent divergence heightens concerns about affordability, social mobility and the role of public policy in redistributing opportunity.

Signals to watch next

  • Wage growth by income quartile (are lower‑income wages improving or stagnating?)
  • Consumer spending breakdowns by income (is spending concentration at the top growing?)
  • Hiring trends in low‑wage industries (is employment cooling or recovering?)
  • Corporate capex in AI and how much of that translates into broader hiring
  • Stock market concentration vs. household participation (who holds the gains?)

A few practical takeaways

  • For workers: Skills and mobility matter. Sectors tied to AI, cloud infrastructure, health care and trade‑sensitive manufacturing may offer different pathways than retail or entry‑level hospitality.
  • For savers and investors: Recognize concentration risk. Heavy reliance on a handful of tech winners can be rewarding — and risky — if broader demand softens.
  • For businesses: Reassess customer segmentation. Firms that depended on volume from younger or lower‑income consumers may need to tweak pricing, value propositions, or product mix.
  • For policymakers: Monitoring and targeted supports (training, childcare, housing affordability) will be essential to prevent a K‑shaped boom from calcifying into longer‑term inequality.

A few numbers that make it real

  • Bank of America card data (October 2025) showed higher‑income households’ spending grew noticeably faster than lower‑income households (roughly 2.7% vs. 0.7% year‑over‑year in October).
  • Federal Reserve data has long shown stock ownership is heavily concentrated; recent analyses report that the top 10% of households own the vast majority of equities, which amplifies asset‑price gains for the wealthy.
    (These figures help explain why stock rallies lift the top arm of the K much more than they lift the bottom.)

My take

We’re living in an economy that can look simultaneously strong and fragile — strong for people whose wealth is tied to rising assets and fragile for those whose day‑to‑day living depends on wages and price stability. The “K” is a useful shorthand, but it’s not destiny. Policy choices, corporate strategies, and investment in people’s skills and safety nets will decide whether that divergence narrows or becomes structural. If you care about sustainable growth that doesn’t leave large groups behind, pay attention to the signals above — and to how policies shift in the next year.

Sources



Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.

Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.