Thomson Reuters cuts engineering jobs as software firms tighten teams

Thomson Reuters cut a small number of engineering roles after telling technology staff in a meeting that the company is still reshaping technical work around artificial intelligence. One employee in that meeting estimated the reduction could reach as many as 500 jobs, which would amount to about 1.8% of Thomson Reuters’ roughly 27,100-person workforce and about 5.2% of its 9,400-person operations and technology unit.

The cuts matter beyond one Canadian information-services company because they fit the pattern software workers across the market are living with: engineering headcount is being measured less by how much a team can build and more by whether its work clearly supports product differentiation, reliability, security and revenue. Thomson Reuters has tied its strategy to aggressive AI deployment across legal, tax and regulatory products, and the staffing move shows how that strategy is changing the shape of the org chart as well as the product roadmap.

For monday.com, the comparison is hard to miss. The Israeli-founded work-OS company reported first-quarter 2026 revenue of $351.3 million, up 24% from a year earlier, and said the quarter delivered record GAAP and non-GAAP operating income. It also launched an AI Work Platform with native agents and shifted to consumption-based pricing, a combination that puts more pressure on teams to prove that engineering time creates measurable product use, not just more surface area in the app.

monday.com ended the quarter with 3,211 employees, while gross retention reached historical highs and enterprise traction kept building, including customers with more than $500,000 in annual recurring revenue. That is the backdrop for engineers, product managers and sales teams watching the Thomson Reuters cuts: the companies still spending are increasingly spending on work that deepens customer adoption, supports larger contracts and helps AI features land inside the product.

The message from both companies is the same, even if the scale is different. Engineering is still valued, but the bar is higher. Teams that can connect their projects to retention, conversion, security or operational leverage are better positioned than teams whose work is harder to tie back to the numbers.