Layoffs are often described through numbers, job reports and industry cycles. Yet the reality sits closer to the individual who loses structure, income and career direction in a single turn.A user recently made a post on Reddit, sharing a similar experience. “Laid off in September, in severe depression and can’t get over it,” he wrote. The disruption was not only economic. It unsettled the early outline of a career he thought he was beginning to build.

His story is a mirror of what many young professionals face in a volatile labour market. “I graduated in August and have a few years of experience now but even so, it still wasn’t enough because I had the audacity to graduate in 2025,” he wrote. Watching peers with only internships move into stable roles made the loss feel sharper. “Here I am with years of experience just bound to go nowhere when I was just getting started.” The comparison deepened his sense of falling behind. Nightmares about the layoff, sleeping “12 to 16 hours” and criticism from family added further strain. It is a reminder that losing a job is not simply a pause in employment. It interrupts confidence, identity and momentum.

What a layoff can open up in your career

Across sectors, companies are reorganising to meet shifting economic conditions. Some grow, others compress, and workers at early stages of their careers often feel these movements most acutely. Yet a layoff, however disruptive, can also be a moment to take stock and consider how to re-enter the market with more clarity.Below are five ways to bounce back after a layoff, grounded in the practices that career coaches often recommend.

Conduct a skills inventory

After job loss, it is common to focus on perceived shortcomings. A structured skills inventory can help redirect attention to strengths. Start by understanding your key achievements, skills and the impact made in recent roles. Questions such as “What are my strengths” or “What was the greatest impact I made in my last job” can help clarify what you bring to future positions. Writing this down creates a concrete record of capability, which supports applications, interviews and confidence.

Seek guidance from a career mentor

A mentor offers perspective at a time when judgement can feel clouded. Mentors help refine decisions, review documents and provide insight into how roles evolve across sectors. Many people maintain mentor relationships after leaving an organisation, while others find them through alumni networks, professional associations or LinkedIn. For someone who feels, as the Reddit user does, that they are “bound to go nowhere”, an experienced voice can introduce structure and direction.

Volunteer or take on freelance work

Short-term work or volunteering can help sustain momentum and maintain skills. It also reintroduces routine at a time when days may feel shapeless. Local organisations, non-profits and digital platforms provide opportunities across writing, design, customer support and technical tasks. Freelance projects can also help you to discover strengths that do not always emerge in formal employment. For those who feel stuck between roles, small projects can serve as steps back into the market.

Build new skills or credentials

Periods of unemployment can feel static, but they can also be used to gain skills that expand career options. Courses in programming, design, data visualisation or other in-demand fields can increase competitiveness. Many low-cost or university-backed programmes provide foundational knowledge without large financial commitments. For workers like the Reddit poster, who fears that graduating in 2025 has limited his prospects, additional training can help counter that sense of narrowing opportunity.

Take active steps to support mental health

Job loss can intensify existing mental health challenges. The Reddit user described being “already severely depressed before being laid off” and feeling pushed beyond his “breaking point”. These reactions are common and not signs of personal failure. Support from therapists, group sessions or community organisations can help steady daily life. Low-cost options, sliding-scale clinics and online support groups offer accessible starting points. Simple activities such as regular walks, hobbies or structured routines can also reduce the sense of drift.A layoff is difficult, particularly when it arrives early in a career or against the backdrop of wider uncertainty. Yet with clear tools and steady support, it is possible to move from disruption to direction. The path forward may not be immediate, but it remains open.

NEW DELHI: Indian women’s team batter Smriti Mandhana had announced on Sunday that her wedding had been called off and asked fans and the media to stop speculation. Music composer Palash Muchhal later confirmed that he had “decided to move on” and warned of legal action against those spreading rumours.Mandhana issued her first public statement on social media after speculation around her personal life grew over the past month. She was scheduled to marry Muchhal on November 23, but the wedding was postponed after her father, Shriniwas, was hospitalised with a heart ailment.

“I need to clarify that the wedding is called off. I would like to close this matter here and implore all of you to do the same,” Mandhana wrote.“Over the past few weeks there has been plenty of speculation around my life and I feel it is important for me to speak out at this time,” she said in an Instagram post.Calling herself a “very private person”, Mandhana said she felt the need to clarify matters publicly. She added that her attention remained on cricket as India prepare for the upcoming international season.“I believe there is a higher purpose driving us all and for me that has always been representing my country at the highest level. I hope to continue to play and win trophies for India for as long as possible,” she said.Soon after Mandhana’s post, Muchhal shared his own statement, saying he had “decided to move on” and expressing distress over online speculation.“I have decided to move on in my life and step back from my personal relationship. It’s been very difficult for me to see people react so easily on baseless rumours about something which has been most sacred to me.“It’s the most difficult phase of my life and I will deal with it gracefully holding on to my beliefs,” he wrote.

Smriti updates Insta bio

As of Tuesday, Mandhana updated her Instagram bio and removed the evil eye emoji. The change has led to renewed discussion on social media, as fans tried to read meaning into the update.After the wedding was postponed, both Mandhana and Muchhal had added the evil eye emoji to their Instagram bios. Muchhal, however, has not removed the emoji from his profile.

Sachin Tendulkar. (File photo)

NEW DELHI: Cricket legend Sachin Tendulkar on Tuesday shared a touching memory from 1989-90 when former India player Gursharan Singh, despite having a broken hand, came out to bat at number 10 to help Tendulkar score 103 runs in an Irani Cup match between Rest of India and Delhi at Wankhede Stadium.Delhi won the match by 309 runs, with Rest of India being bowled out for 245 while chasing a target of 554. Besides Tendulkar’s century, WV Raman’s 41 was the only other notable performance.When Rest of India was struggling at 209 for nine wickets, Gursharan Singh walked out to bat with his broken hand. He helped add 36 runs for the final wicket partnership with Tendulkar.

“As they say, promises are meant to be kept. I feel I’ll go a step further and say that promises are meant to be kept, but also meant to be delivered… and that is what is our DNA,” Tendulkar recalled at an event.“I can recall an incident… long way back in 1989 when I was playing Irani Trophy. This was a trial match before one got selected for India. I was batting in the 90s, and my partner, Gursharan Singh, had an injury — a broken hand — and he wasn’t supposed to bat. But he was asked by the chairman of the selection committee, Raj Singh Dungarpur, to go out and bat and support his teammate. Gursharan came and helped me reach my hundred and I got selected to play for India after that. Afterward, Gursharan also became part of the Indian cricket team.”Gursharan Singh, who later played one Test match and one ODI for India, received heartfelt gratitude from Tendulkar for his gesture.“I thanked him profusely on the ground and in the dressing room because it was a big thing for him to come out with a broken hand,” Tendulkar said.“Just stepping out with a broken hand was significant. Whether I scored a hundred or not was secondary. His intent and attitude mattered most to me (and) that truly touched my heart,” he added.

A new grain of conflict: Trump takes aim at India’s rice exports

US President Donald Trump on Tuesday signalled a fresh flashpoint with India questioning why New Delhi is “allowed” to send large volumes of rice to the United States without facing additional duties, indicating that new tariffs could be on the table as trade talks struggle to advance.The remarks came during a White House meeting where Trump launched a $12-billion support package for American farmers, a core constituency that has been pressing him to counter rising imports.

In an exchange with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Trump asked, “Why is India allowed to do that (‘dumping rice into the US’)? They have to pay tariffs. Do they have an exemption on rice?” When Bessent replied, “No, sir. We’re still working on their trade deal…”, Trump was firm. “They should not be dumping (rice)… They cannot do that…”Farmers in several states have complained of falling prices and intensified competition from rice-exporting countries such as India, Vietnam and Thailand. Trump told them he would “take care” of the issue, insisting, “They shouldn’t be dumping. I mean, I heard that, I heard that from others. You can’t do that.” Trump’s comments come as both sides prepare for another round of trade talks in New Delhi on December 10.

Trump moved to reassure America’s farm belt with a fresh $12 billion support package, calling it essential relief for growers still dealing with the fallout from recent trade disruptions. He told farmers at the White House roundtable that the payments would offer “much-needed certainty” as they take this year’s harvest to market and plan for the next season. The programme channels $11 billion to row-crop producers through one-time bridge payments, with the remaining funds set aside for other commodities once the details are finalised.Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the payments will be transferred by February 28and described the package as a stabilising measure until wider benefits from new trade agreements materialise. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent characterised the aid as a “liquidity bridge during a period of adjustment”, arguing that many farmers are still recovering from lost export markets and high production costs. The money will be drawn from the Commodity Credit Corporation and offset by tariff revenue, according to the administration.Trump claimed the sector had been “crushed by the worst inflation in modern history and crippling restrictions on energy, water and countless other necessities”, while again insisting that foreign competitors had long benefited from unfair trading terms. He said he had urged China’s President Xi Jinping to expand soybean purchases beyond commitments already made, adding, “I think he’s going to do more than he promised to do.”Critics questioned the approach, with Senator Amy Klobuchar saying the simplest way to offer certainty would be to end tariff-driven pressure on farmers.The push for new duties comes against the backdrop of persistent friction in US–India trade ties. Earlier this year, Washington imposed a combined 50 per cent tariff on Indian goods. Negotiations on the Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA), first proposed in February, aim to raise trade from USD 191 billion to USD 500 billion by 2030, but progress has been slowed by shifting tariff policies and disagreements over market access.Indian officials remain optimistic. Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agarwal recently said New Delhi was “very hopeful” of finalising the first tranche of the agreement within the year. The government has also been assessing the impact of a series of US measures, including reciprocal tariffs under emergency powers and changes to H-1B visa rules that could affect skilled workers.During the address, Trump also said he could target fertiliser coming from Canada, arguing that domestic production must be encouraged. “A lot of it does come in from Canada, and so we’ll end up putting very severe tariffs on that, if we have to, because that’s the way you want to bolster here,” he said. “And we can do it here. We can all do that here.”

NEW DELHI: Opposition parties on Monday said the discussion on Vande Mataram in Parliament was timed for the approaching West Bengal assembly polls and that the govt wanted to divert attention from the problems people were facing.Participating in a discussion in Lok Sabha on 150 years of the national song, penned by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra hit out at Modi, saying he is not the PM he used to be as his “self-confidence was decreasing and policies were weakening the country”. The Wayanad MP also slammed BJP for targeting India’s first PM Jawaharlal Nehru and alleged the govt wanted the debate to make fresh charges against those who fought for the country’s freedom.The Congress MP also listed the “chronology” of ‘Vande Mataram’, citing Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s letter to which Nehru replied, to rebut the PM’s charge that Congress indulged in politics of appeasement over the national song.Let’s have debate on Nehru, close that chapter: Priyanka GandhiModi ji mentioned a letter in the House, in which he said that on Oct 20, Nehru ji had written to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. But the PM did not mention the letter written on Oct 17, which Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose ji had written to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru ji… PM Modi quoted one line of this (Nehru’s) reply here, but the rest of what Nehru ji wrote was – ‘there is no doubt that the present outcry against Vande Mataram is to a large extent a manufactured one by the Communalists. Whatever we do, we cannot pander to Communalist feelings’,” Priyanka Gandhi said.Referring to Modi’s speech, she said, “Since you keep talking about Nehru, let’s do one thing, let’s assign a time for a discussion, list out all the insults against him… debate it and let’s close the chapter once and for all,” she said, adding that “after that, let’s talk about today’s issues – price rise and unemployment…The topic that we are discussing is part of the soul of the country. When we mention ‘Vande Mataram’, it reminds us of the history of our freedom struggle. This debate is strange; this song has made a place in people’s hearts; so what is the need for a debate?” Priyanka said. In 1896, Rabindranath Tagore sang it for the first time at a Congress session, she said.She added questioning the decision of having the first two stanzas of ‘Vande Mataram’ as the national song was akin to questioning the Constituent Assembly and its members.Congress deputy leader in LS Gaurav Gogoi said it is the PM’s habit to keep referring to Nehru and Congress whenever he speaks on any issue. “He (Modi) took Nehru ji’s name 14 times and that of Congress 50 times during the debate on Operation Sindoor. When there was a discussion on the 75th anniversary of the Constitution, Nehru’s name was taken 10 times and that of Congress 26 times.” “During the discussion on the President’s address in 2022, he took Nehru ji’s name 15 times. The PM, during the discussion on the President’s address in 2020, took Nehru ji’s name 20 times. I want to say with utmost humility to Modi ji and his entire system, no matter how hard you try, you won’t be able to put even a single blot on Pandit Nehru’s contributions.” Gogoi said the PM’s speech had two objectives – “to rewrite history and give a political colour to this debate”.

TOI correspondent from Washington : Tariffs? What tariffs? In a resounding rebuff to US efforts to corral its manufacturing might and gargantuan growth, China announced a $ 1 trillion trade surplus with the world on Monday, leaving Washington, New Delhi, Brussels among others capitals wringing their hands. It is the first time in human history that any country has crossed the $ 1 trillion milestone – which means China exported more (approximately $3.6 trillion worth of goods) than it imported (about $ 2.6 trillion) – cementing its standing as a manufacturing superpower. The watershed moment came despite Trump’s tariff tentacles as Chinese manufacturers slipped through the American grab, diversifying their markets, lessening dependence on the US, and demonstrating resilience in the face of headwinds, something India is struggling to do. Trade figures show exports from China to the US plunged nearly 29% year-on-year in November 2025, marking the eighth consecutive month of double-digit decline, but Beijing more than made up for it by cranking up exports to EU, South East Asia, India, and Africa. In November 2025 alone, Chinese exports rose by 5.9% year-on-year, while imports grew just 1.9%, generating a monthly surplus of roughly $111.7 billion — one of the largest monthly surpluses China has ever logged.While the U.S whittled down Chinese imports to a degree, New Delhi, like much of the world, was at the receiving end of Beijing’s export boom. India’s imports from China in fiscal year 2024-25 surging to $113.45 billion, while its exports to China dwindled to just $14.25 billion – a staggering trade deficit of nearly $ 100 billion. It is the largest deficit New Delhi has ever had with any trading partner as Indians sucked up Chinese electronics, cell phones, toys, machinery, batteries, and solar cells, some of it vital to India’s manufacturing and infrastructure sectors.Economists and policymakers were gobsmacked by the sheer scale of China’s surplus, particularly in light of Trump tariffs. The $1.076 trillion figure in 2025 overshoots by far the previous record of $ 992 billion under more propitious circumstances in 2024, underlining how resilient and broad China’s export engine has become — even as trade tensions and tariffs persisted. In 2024, roughly one-third of China’s total surplus — about $360 billion — came from trade with the US It ran up a similar surplus with the EU. In fact, there is no widely-reported country or bloc to which China runs a consistent large-scale trade deficit in goods. Instead, most major economies — from the US and EU to India — run substantial deficits with China.Much of China’s growing trade surplus despite U.S tariffs came from rerouting shipments to other destinations. Chinese exports to the EU surged 15% from a year earlier. While exports to the US for November plunged 29% from a year earlier, Beijing posted an overall 5.9% increase in exports to rest of the world, with Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America accounting for 26%, 14% and 7.1% increase respectively.The widening imbalances risk reshaping global manufacturing geography, amid fears that China is not only dominating low-cost production, but also high-tech supply chains, locking in dependencies for years, as it demonstrated with its stranglehold on rare earths product supply. The $1 trillion-plus surplus also gives Beijing room to absorb domestic economic weakness — notably weak consumption and a troubled property sector — without relying on foreign debt or capital inflows like most other countries. Such has been the Chinese dominance that even U.S commentators expressed grudging admiration for its powerhouse push. “China established itself as a maker of cheap wigs, sneakers and Christmas lights in the 1980s and 1990s, earning a moniker as the world’s factory floor. But that was just the beginning… In recent years, its leading-edge companies have established themselves as dominant players in solar panels, electric vehicles and the semiconductors that power everyday household items,” the Wall Street Journal acknowledged, noting that China is making itself an indispensable cog in global supply chains spanning technology, transport, medicine and consumer goods.Beijing itself was modesty personified as it broke new barriers. “We want to be lowkey, but our capabilities is just too much,” the country’s office of foreign liaison posted on X. “The Chinese century is being imposed upon us, we have no choice but to take the mantle of responsibility,” it added.

NEW DELHI: West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday sharply criticised the Centre over the nationwide flight chaos triggered by IndiGo’s deepening operational crisis, calling the situation “a disaster” and accusing the BJP-led government of failing passengers as large-scale cancellations entered the seventh straight day.Indigo flight cancellations follow live updatesSpeaking in Kolkata, Banerjee said the crisis had left ordinary flyers abandoned without alternatives. “What is the alternative for the public? It is most unfortunate that the maximum number of flights have stopped. This is a disaster. Thousands of passengers are stranded in airports. They are feeling mentally tortured,” she said.She urged the Centre to intervene immediately, adding, “I ask the Government of India to make a plan to resolve this. The BJP government is not interested in matters related to the country and the people. But the BJP cares only about how to capture institutions.”Her remarks came as more than 250 IndiGo services were cancelled from Delhi and Bengaluru alone on Monday, as reported by PTI. The disruptions rippled across major airports including Hyderabad, Ahmedabad, Mumbai and Chennai. Delhi saw 134 cancellations, while Bengaluru recorded 117, marking one of the worst single-day breakdowns of airline operations in recent years.The airline, which has struggled with massive pilot shortages and new crew duty-time regulations, is under increasing scrutiny from regulators and the judiciary. The Directorate General of Civil Aviation on Sunday extended by 24 hours the deadline for IndiGo CEO Pieter Elbers and COO Isidro Porqueras to respond to a show-cause notice over what it said were “significant lapses in planning, oversight, and resource management.”IndiGo has faced public anger after cancelling thousands of flights since December 2, culminating in an unprecedented 1,600 cancellations on Friday. Elbers later issued a video apology but passengers at airports nationwide continue to report long queues, confusion over rebooking, and inadequate assistance.The crisis has now reached the Delhi high court, where a Public Interest Litigation has sought urgent intervention. The petitioner described the airport situation as “inhumane,” alleging that many stranded passengers were left without support or timely refunds. The court has agreed to hear the matter in detail on Wednesday.

Women in leadership positions

For more than a decade, Indian companies have showcased their lone woman director as a badge of compliance, the corporate equivalent of checking a box and calling it progress. But behind the polished annual reports and celebratory statements lies a quieter, more uncomfortable truth: women have finally entered the boardroom, yet the boardroom has not opened its doors to them.A new report by Khaitan & Co., Aon, and Ladies Who Lead – Presence to Influence: Advancing Women in Indian Boardrooms, forces India Inc. to confront this reality. It reveals that while 98% of BSE-200 companies now have at least one woman director, mandated by the Companies Act 2013, the mandate has birthed visibility, not voice. Representation has risen, but relevance has not.This is the heart of India’s corporate paradox: Women are present, yet power remains elsewhere.

The illusion of progress: When presence becomes symbolic

The data strips away any remaining illusions. Seventy-seven percent of BSE-200 boards have only one or two women, even when board sizes stretch to 15 members or more. These numbers do not reflect diversity; they reflect minimalism, inclusion measured by the smallest acceptable unit.And the disparity deepens as one moves up the ladder of influence. Only 11% of women directors occupy executive roles, compared with 65% of men. This means the overwhelming majority of women on boards are kept at the periphery of strategic decision-making, rarely entrusted with the operational levers that shape a company’s future.The top job is even further away. Just 7% of BSE-200 board chairpersons are women. In the NIFTY-500, the number falls to 5%. These are not simply titles; they are positions that set culture, steer debate, and outline vision. When women are missing from these chairs, they are missing from the command centre of corporate India.

Corporate India’s silent norm: Bias dressed as culture

One of the most striking findings comes not from statistics but from lived experience. More than one in three women directors report persistent stereotyping, dismissive behaviour, and subtle but damaging undercurrents of tokenism, the report reveals. Their presence is acknowledged; their authority is doubted.Interviewees describe interruptions, minimisation of expertise, and unspoken assumptions that they are present to satisfy a statutory checkbox. Many say they must over-prepare, over-deliver, and over-exert simply to be seen as equal. Bias, instead of fading with progress, has evolved — becoming quieter, more coded, and more resistant.This is the emotional labour that never appears in corporate disclosures.Where women lead, diversity follows, the data is unmistakableThe report reveals a telling correlation: Companies helmed by women CEOs have nearly double the female board representation of male-led firms, 31% versus 17.7%. This is not coincidence. It is a cultural cause and effect.When leadership reflects diversity, boardrooms follow. When leadership does not, the board becomes a mirror of entrenched norms.Yet the irony is stark. Women CEOs account for only 6% of leadership across BSE-200 companies, a figure far too small to drive systemic change at scale. The system needs more than outliers; it needs an overhaul.

Four women, five women, six women: The tipping point

Another insight stands out: Companies with 4–6 women directors show stronger, more consistent gender diversity across the organisation. This suggests that diversity has a threshold, a point at which it shifts from symbolic to structural.One woman in the boardroom is compliance.Two is optics.Four or more begin to rewrite norms.It is at this threshold that women stop being “the only one” and start being a collective force, influencing strategy, challenging assumptions, and redefining leadership culture.

The deeper question: What does representation without voice achieve?

India has spent a decade celebrating the presence of women in the boardroom. But presence alone cannot ensure perspective, power, or participation. A seat at the table means little if the chair doesn’t swivel when you speak.The report forces us to confront a harder truth: Compliance laws can open doors, but only culture can let women walk through them with influence.

What must change now

For meaningful gender equity in corporate India, three fundamental shifts are needed:Move beyond the “minimum woman” mindsetMandated representation must evolve into deliberate, strategic inclusion. Companies must expand the number of women on boards, not simply appoint one or two.Build the pipeline to leadership, not just to the boardroomThe scarcity of women CEOs and executive directors is not an accident, it is the result of a broken leadership pipeline. Fixing it requires intentional mentorship, succession planning, and structural support.Dismantle entrenched bias, loudly and publiclyBoards must acknowledge gender bias as a governance issue, not a social one. Blind spots must be named before they can be corrected.

The bottom line: India doesn’t have a talent problem; it has a gatekeeping problem

Indian companies do not lack qualified women. They lack the will to put them in positions that shape decisions rather than decorate them.Meaningful representation is not a moral aspiration, it is a business imperative. Companies that include women meaningfully in leadership consistently outperform those that don’t. The data proves it. The global evidence confirms it.India has made progress. But progress without power is performative.If corporate India truly wants to modernise its boardrooms, it must confront its own contradictions, and recognise that the future of governance cannot be built on a foundation that keeps half the talent pool waiting in the corridor of influence.The question now is not whether women deserve a place in leadership.It is whether India Inc. is finally ready to listen when they get there.