Well, the unionized staff didn't seem to be impacted by the last round. I'm inclined to say it's at least probable that it might have proved beneficial.

Is "harm" the right word to use to describe workers who were made redundant? At what point is laying someone off or firing them considered not harmful?

When they don't need to work to survive, which is never in our system.

They can presumably get another job somewhere else. I don't think harm is done until they are unfairly deprived

I am glad you have never had to deal with a job search after being fired so someone can make the quarterly numbers that result in getting a bonus that is more than you will earn in a life time, but the rest of us recognize it as an unfair deprivation from the outset.

Nah, getting another job is painful. Though change can be good. To account: It costs people to be laid off .. from psychological through to cash.

'Unfair' is relative to the relationship between the employee and employer, which is one Individual, and one Corporation. Sure there is a contract and labor protection laws. However all of us are stupid in some way (s). So disruption can have unforseen negative consequences.