Every time the newsrooms I've been in have had another round of layoffs, the top editors took an incredibly misguided approach with the staffers who were left. Instead of saying something like, "I know it's tough. But we're glad to still have this bunch with us. Thank you again for working so hard," they instead adopted the attitude of, "You're lucky you still have a job. So buckle down and show us the happy, or you'll be out the door next."
My boss (who has been involved in laying people off) is a good guy, and I like and respect him for doing the best he can under difficult circumstances. But in recent one-on-one conversations with me, he has made some candid, chilling comments. One was, "I can't really blame anyone here for looking for another job." First time in all my years of having bosses that I've heard that from a supervisor, and his implication was, "I wouldn't blame YOU for looking for another job." The other -- even more shocking and chilling -- was, "Hypothetically, what would it take to get you to consider agreeing to a buyout?" I asked if anything was imminent and he said no, he was just interested in responses from me and a few others. So I gave him some conditions the company is certain never to meet. My educated guess is that he or the company, or both, are pondering possible downsizing exit strategies.
So since then, I've been applying whenever there's a job listing I'm marginally qualified for. Don't feel like retiring for at least a few more years, and it's debatable whether I can afford to right now anyway. Considering my age, the aforementioned lack of experience and employers' narrow focus on applicants' qualifications, another job is a long shot. And based on the anecdotal evidence, most of these jobs would mean a 25 percent pay cut or so. But it's like hockey -- if you don't shoot, you won't score.