The problem with Fidelity is that it bloats itself over the years and then cuts core job functions trying to fix the bloat, which leads to downstream chaos. It really should use the last in first out method because the people added since the last round of layoffs aren't probably in a core job function.
When you loose senior people with decades of experiences you have system that break. Laying off a newbie phone rep might make call volume wait times go up slightly, but when a critical system app fails because of a experienced support staff being let go really drives up call volumes of angry customers asking why can't they do this or that.
Cutting older workers with experience might look like cost savings because of higher benefits cost, but they have earned those benefits and experience can't be easily replaced.
This seems so obvious, @OdZFohT-lgpr, and yet it's the same mistake they keep doing. Yes, they can see an increase in profits during the quarter when layoffs happen, but that is the only time they will see it. The effect of losing experienced workers will linger on, and cause the company to lose money in the long run. Yet, nobody seems to want to look beyond the immediate quarter.