In the UK I expect most of these people will find jobs, they will have skills that are in short supply. The older ones, well, someone has to make room for the young ones to get started, especially those with young families.
On the other hand, the unskilled job market hasn't improved for generations, since the 1980s. Technology has made many low-end jobs disappear, that's the irony.
The management did fall on its collective sword in January 2011 (see http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4212330/Trident-s-top-execs-resign)
This is the "turn-around" CEO appointed in June 2011 (see http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4216712/Former-Anadigics-CEO-to-lead-Trident-Micro)
Surely to effectively reduce costs, the axe must fall only on the fat, not on the lean. To have gotten 20% overweight is really an indictment of management which should, by rights, fall on its collective sword. Getting in smarter managers would be an effective 'turnaround strategy' otherwise its just a roundabout strategy. This 'cost cutting' is probably massaging the bottom line to placate the beancounters.
And not only that, it's rare that schedules are adjusted to compensate for the reduced workforce - therefore, those that are not cut are 'fortunate' enough to find themselves with a lot of extra work to do, and no raise because "you're lucky to have a job, look at all those people we just fired." Not that I'm bitter ;-)
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.