The story centers around the drive by Japanese companies to cut costs by "profitable redundancy," a system where older employees are urged to retire to improve the firm's bottom line. The involuntary departure of a 57-year-old employee who had assumed he was secure in his job is presented as a stark example. Despite healthy business performance, more and more Japanese companies are adopting this approach, resulting in large numbers of middle-aged workers suddenly finding themselves out of a job.

In Japan, lifetime employment used to be a hallmark of the corporate sector. However, with shrinking profit margins and increased global competition, some businesses have resorted to 'profitable redundancy'. This move is controversial and met with concern and dissent in Japanese society, which traditionally values respect and stability for older workers.

In the US or EU, there have been similar discussions around redundancy and its social impact. That said, cultures of 'at-will employment' or 'fire and hire' models are more prevalent there, with fewer legal protections for older employees compared to Japan. Workers are generally well-aware of this possibility throughout their careers, unlike in Japan where the shift represents a significant cultural change from the traditional lifelong employment model.