Further support here for the core of Atticus' comment. I clicked through here only to scold you on the unfair setup of the headline and brief blurb in the email summary I received. I run a small firm (in the US), I know that laying people off is painful for all involved, and that it's sometimes necessary, for a variety of reasons. Running an architecture firm takes adaptability. The AJ should be taking a more even-handed approach to this, it seems to me.
I do not see what is "woke" about the headline, though -- there is no allegation of bias or untoward discrimination, right? It may just be the basic bias that I see a lot in the UK's architectural coverage (e.g. the Guardian's use of 'profit-based' as a pejorative term when applied to architecture projects or developments). Or perhaps it is just that lowest of all journalistic lows: clickbait.
Regardless, please do better!
Your headline shows great confusion about the nature of the architecture profession! Chipperfield *is* a starchitect, and on that list of candidates, I think he is one of the top two in terms of star status (with Adjaye).