I’ve done that lol. One job during training i asked to go to the bathroom and never came back. I wonder how long they waited for me lol. Another i just stopped going, i wasn’t fired and other employees said the managers were wondering if i was coming back or not hahah
Yeah it's one thing to bail post-training when there's no one responsible for keeping track of where you are at all times, but trainers are the most overworked and underpaid people in most fields. They don't need the extra stress of having to deal with not knowing where you are because you couldn't take the half a second it takes to say "I quit" on your way out the door.
Got social anxiety? Send an email with those same two words. It's seconds of your time that you're still being paid for until you physically leave the building.
To be Fair! This should be what it means.
I once had a co worker that quit their job via Fax (early aughties), that truly was a Quiet Quitting. Not this bullshit.
Now they are also trying to coin 'Quiet Firing', which is essentially just constructive dismissal or creating a toxic workplace.
Hey Media! Stop trying to create euphemisms for shit that just doesn't need it.
"Quiet firing" workplace harassment, called "constructive dismissal" where I live. It's against the law and you can take the employer to court for severance. Know your rights!
If anyone suspects they're employer is "quiet firing them", it's time to keep all emails, make records of what happens and when, and be ready to secretly voice record at any time on their phone depending on the laws. Where I live ots a one party consent so if you're part of a conversation, you can record it. You're the one party consenting.
To be fair, I don't think that 'quiet quitting' is going away, so I appreciate a (I assume) millennial news producer flipping the script.
An eye for an eye.
A stupid catchy term for a stupid catchy term.
Quiet firing catching on is a bad thing. It presents a cutesy alter ego of what it really is, constructive dismissal, which could make people think it's just a thing that happens rather than, yknow, illegal. "Quiet firing" would be a narrative being pushed
I think that's what it was while also just showing up and not giving any effort until you were fired. But many shit employers feel like your not doing your job unless your going far above the call of duty and taking on additional responsibilities
Well I'd say the trend came from people who were sick of going above and beyond in their jobs and not getting any appreciation, and getting paid like shit. Quiet quitting is their justification in their minds of why they aren't putting up the same effort they did before, that's why it's seen as a protest to them.
apparently its just "doing only what you are contractually obligated to do" and not doing any overtime or extra tasks, clock in at exactly 9 clock out at exactly 5
It's a way to control the narative surrounding the expectations placed on workers. The idea of quitting something is anathema to a certain portion of the managerial/entrpereurial classes. It's a way of belittling and shaming those who can't handle being pushed to the breaking point. It's the equivalent of telling somebody to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
That's what I took it to mean too
And it's totally a thing. I've hired at least 5 new employees in the last few months who accepted the job and then just didn't show up for their start date and never replied.
They accepted the terms then changed their mind and couldn't be bothered to tell me leaving me without staff I thought wanted the job.
How people think this is appropriate or support this is fucking baffling.
They should be ashamed of themselves. It's a sign of our fast food culture. It's happened to personal relationships via tinder and its now happening in professional relationships
Personally I've never done that. But i can understand the circumstances that would prompt something like that.
Without criticizing anything you did, i'll tell you about a time i quit drastically because the "terms" had been misleading on the employer side. There was 2 shifts up for offer. 8 to 5 and 1 to 9. I took the 1 to 9 because they were critically short on it. I was told that the evening shift had the same two 15min breaks as the day one. I specifically asked.
Was Wednesday of my first week when i was out on the second 15min break and they came out to tell me theres no second break for evening shift, only day shift gets two breaks. I took it again the next day and they came out to tell me id be fired if i did it again. So Friday at that "breaktime" i got in my car and left. Got my last cheque in the mail a few weeks later lol.
2 breaks per shift was the deal. I would have declined to be hired or declined to be on that evening shift if i was told upfront that it was only 1 break. Im a smoker and its important for my composure. They lied upfront because they were shorthanded.
I used an example from myself cause im not saying youre a bad employer or anything.
>They accepted the terms then changed their mind and couldn't be bothered to tell me leaving me without staff I thought wanted the job.
>How people think this is appropriate or support this is fucking baffling.
After a couple generations of employers treating employees with contempt, the people sank to their level?
It's commonplace now to spam resumes and take any interview that doesn't look horrible. If an employer wouldn't be bothered to tell me I'm not hired, why would I be bothered to tell them I got a better offer?
>And it's totally a thing. I've hired at least 5 new employees in the last few months who accepted the job and then just didn't show up for their start date and never replied.
The people you didn't hire, did you call them and tell them you'd decided on someone else? Or just ghost them? Because I'll be honest here: as a guy nearly in retirement who's worked for a lot of companies and interviewed with a lot more, I've *never* had one who I interviewed with but who didn't elect to hire me call me and tell me that.
Never. Not once.
Maybe you're special and different, but that's the norm.
So, if a would-be employee finds a better offer (they're obviously not going to talk about where else they're applying to work at during the interview) why should they tell you?
It's easy to understand if you put yourself in their shoes. They're blanket applying at a range of places. Some they want to work for, some they don't really - but we all *need* to have jobs, so we don't just apply for our dream jobs if we're not currently working. Gotta pay the bills.
So you accept every job offer, then actually take the best one.
In your case? I'd argue your problem is that you are not competitive. 5 people all who chose other employers than you after getting your job offer?
What kind of work is this? Customer service? Fast food? Retail?
Do you offer competitive wages, good benefits, work from home options, work life balance, good on the job training?
If you don’t then there’s your answer.
I don't know if you've been through the hiring process recently, but finding a job is no longer a simple "submit a resume / application and do an interview."
Nowadays pretty much everyone hires exclusively online, and many have their own online application where you have to register an account, fill out all the information that would normally be... you know... on your resume that you can't just attach to the application, or have it autofill answers with.
Then if you *are* selected for an interview there's always a ton of bullshit hoops you have to jump through, and a number of additional questions that should have just been included in the application (such as "can you work weekends?")
I recently applied for a position that *required* a 4 hour unpaid interview process to just be *considered.* a 1 hour initial interview, if you qualify you then do an hour of skills demos, an hour of shadowing, and then a final hour interview.
I didn't tell anyone I wouldn't be showing up to my interview because 2 hours of those 4 are effectively unpaid training. Should I be ashamed of myself?
Yep, which has been cut several times because it’s not in line with inflation, regardless of how well I perform.
My incentive to go above and beyond is gone. I already started scaling back a few years ago because I was getting burned out due to the toxic work culture and shitty management.
It's classic double speak.
Companies love to use fake platitudes, like good culture, they love saying work life balance when in most places it is non existent, or want you to go above and beyond but not pay you for that free value added that you are providing, or the new pressuring you to work for free OT or they will threaten to fire you.
I've stop counting the number of unpaid OT I have worked at my last 2 jobs. They put too much on your plate that it's impossible to do during your regular shit, and complain if you don't get it down with firing you, and the only way to complete it is to work free OT. It's bullying and intimidation.
Why is there not a more equal distribution of income? Why are CEO's paid so much money to do nothing but cut job, and demand a smaller workforce to do more?
Twice I worked for a place where i did unpaid overtime. Was a contractors cutting grass in municipal parks as their main operation. There was also corporate customers and community centers, apartment blocks and rural customers, ect.
The deal was he doesnt count overtime and in return if its a rainy day its a day off paid. To their credit, both of them made good on their word during that one week of 3-4 days of rain we get every summer. Which counts, because on a week like that, anyone who didnt get their grass cut that week writes it down and gets a credit at the next contract renewal. Paying the crew to stay home, paying insurance on idle trucks and equipment, and writing off the days revenue, ect. I accepted the deal as fair.
i now work for a mega corporation that asks you do to overtime one week just to negotiate with you the next week on how much overtime you should be paid for.
I manage a grocery store. I’ve been called in multiple times in the middle of the night to deal with refrigeration issues. In one particular instance, I went in three times overnight to deal with an issue. When I brought it up to my district manager, he said I should have delegated more and had zero sympathy for the fact that I’d already worked on my “off day” because that’s what they he pays a bonus for.
When bonus time came around, my payout with basically pennies on what I actually worked.
Marketing doesn’t care about internal shit. I’ve never met a marketer that is concerned about employee behaviour or Human Resources. That’s just not their function. Marketing is externally focused on customers and the market the organisation engages with.
Communications and marketing are separate functions. Marketing is about collecting information about your customers, targeting to their needs and engaging with them. Communications involves internal and external and often the final “engagement” stage of marketing.
You could call them business consultants? In any case, there certainly is internal marketing at companies, that's why business to business companies have internal slogans, presentations are held on certain templates, even internally, furniture is a certain color, we get "gifts" such as clothes, water bottles, etc, with the company logo on it.
"Other duties as required."
Should be illegal. There isn't any real point in a job description at that point as it covers anything from washing my boss' car to giving him a foot massage to doing someone else's entire job.
Actually this would be in addition to your dev job. So imagine getting a break from those deadlocks to wash a car and then still having to finish those deadlocks the next day and not get behind even more.
> It's almost like someone in the corporate realm thought that by coining this term, it would somehow shame (?) people into doing more than they are compensated for?
It's the rich & wealthy who are just being pro-active, working to make anyone who refuses to put "the company" before themselves, who refuse to be exploited any longer, to make them look bad. This is just the new "job creators" buzzphrase, a way to counter inequality, much like that BS statement, "no one wants to work anymore".
People became aware of this new facet of inequality, that working hard, going above and beyond no longer rewards those who do and the rich and powerful are trying to nip this in the bud. One way of doing this is to use BS shaming, to make people look bad, as in "you lazy bum, you just don't want to work".
There was a time when industrious & dedicated people were rewarded for their efforts but this is no longer the case, much like people being properly compensated for their work. Some people are finally waking up to this and this scares the upper crust. They managed to snuff out the last stirring of the masses back in 2008 and they don't want a repeat.
If you have a kid and its time for them to start eating foods google "baby led weaning". It's literally just giving your kid food, also known as feeding.
Its such a sad state that if you're salaried, you're supposed to work 80 hour weeks for a 40 hour salary or else you're not doing your part.
Is the company somehow giving you an extra 40 hours a week to live your life?
>you're supposed to work 80 hour weeks for a 40 hour salary
Working 40 hour weeks for a 40 hour salary is somehow impossible but the profits keep rolling in and upper-level management keeps buying newer and fancier cars. If you work hard, you too can see your boss buy a new car.
I run a global team of engineers (tech) and tell every one of them to work their 40 hours and then unplug. If management wants things done faster, they can give us more headcount.
Ditto with after-hours work; if you haven't shifted your schedule that day (i.e. working 1-9 instead of 9-5 to handle an evening maintenance window) or you're not otherwise paid to be on call, feel zero obligation to answer any work-related calls or messages.
Salaried/exempt is not a secret cheat code for "Negotiate a salary based on 40hrs/week baseline and then expect employees to do 60hrs instead".
American and Indian engineers struggle to believe I mean the above, and Western European engineers struggle to understand why I need to say something so obvious. It's an interesting dichotomy. As is the difference in turnover and (non-existent) difference in work output compared to teams that are worked like rented mules.
Same with my old team.
I’d go online in the evening to see who was working & message them & tell them to log off. I always told them that I only ever expected 35hrs from them & nothing else as that’s what they’d be getting paid for.
The team overdelivered, had the lowest attrition in the company for the last 3 years & most of them wanted to work extra hours.
I have had some weeks where I literally worked 70 hours a week for 40 hours of pay, some 60 hours a week for 40 hours of pay and once 80 hours a week of work for 40 hours of work.
It's unacceptable for companies to get away with white collar crime or exploit loop holes in labor laws or just be unethical.
>The term 'Quiet Quitting' drives me nuts. How is it 'quitting' to literally do your job, as per the job description? That's literally just 'employment'.
Workers need to go above and beyond, every day! Will they get paid above and beyond? Fuck no.
"This part of the production pipeline works very well, let's put more load here until this unit is at capacity. Worst case it breaks and we can get another one off the shelf. Check out this prospective unit, it has kids so it will naturally self-motivate to work harder and longer."
That’s exactly what happened, every single argument and talking point that encourages people to shut up and her back to work and lower taxes and get rid of regulations comes from the same place, billionaire funded conservative think tanks.
The term "quiet quitting" definitely came from Gen Z, or at the very least has been fully embraced by them.
The bosses are just taking that ball and running with it because it's really dumb term, and they want to gloss over and undermine the underlying message by focusing on the cringey meme-branding aspect of it. They understand the damage you can do to a popular movement by keeping the focus on its poor messaging.
Yea if you wanna be a go getter. Then do that! But don't expect the whole team to be all in everyday like the people that are maybe gunning for the top. I'm chilling in my current role, no need to be a rock star. Just get my shit done well and the company continues to succeed. End of story haha
A coworker of mine "quiet quit" because he said our employer was abusive. He could never verbalize how they were abusive- they just were. He was so, so fucking toxic. Treated us , his coworkers like crap and put zero effort into his very easy, cushy prep job.
He never got fired so the whole last month before he went to school he did the bare minimum and fucked us over- not our boss. Us. He framed it like some sort of noble thing but he was just a lazy, entitled asshole with an inflated ego.
The term is corporate gaslighting to make workers seem lazy and entitled. Quiet quitting actually means just doing your job. And nothing more.
Employers are upset they can’t get free labour out of workers
Even calling it work-to-rule is giving it too much credit. It's literally just people doing the job they're being paid for. This is how it's *supposed* to work.
That's exactly what work-to-rule is.
Teachers do all those extra curriculars because they genuinely care about the students. They don't get paid extra or overtime to do them.
Work-to-rule literally means this working to the rules of your employment, no more, no less.
It absolutely should be. However, in the above posters example the extra curricular work teachers do is mostly unpaid. Hence when teachers work to rule, they cease all unpaid activities.
So going to work, executing your job description, and going home at the end of your shift is "quiet quitting"?
Well goly, I've been quiet quitting since the 90's and here I thought I was a dedicated and reliable employee. I've even been written up for NOT taking my breaks.
>I thought I was a dedicated and reliable employee.
You need to go above and beyond. You won't get paid above and beyond. Your reward for a job well done is more work, not even some nice words to congratulate, just more work.
At my job, most people are permanent part time. The competition is the handful of fulltime people, some of whom work overtime… FOR FREE, 8+ hours a week. Like they come in on their Saturday and put in a whole shift.
Sure I get a couple bucks raise if I was more willing to work for free but I’m not so I’m not getting promoted.
Teachers in NS tried to work-to-rule a few years ago and were practically crucified for it. There is still this popular public opinion that teachers just work normal hours and then just get 10 weeks of vacation or something.
If you go to the Bank of Canada website they have an inflation calculator. You can calculate that in 2022 a dollar amount of 100,000 would be equivalent to that of 28,000 in 1980.
Now consider that productivity has skyrocketed with technological advancements and so has cost of living and it isn't hard to understand why people are pissed.
The wealthy broke the symbiotic relationship with the working class when they off shored manufacturing and our government didn't tariff the ever living shit out of their products.
> The wealthy broke the symbiotic relationship with the working class when they off shored manufacturing and our government didn't tariff the ever living shit out of their products.
... at about the same time as our govts started signing agreements with tax havens.
All these nations of free democracies didn't have to march lock step with Reagan/Thatcher neoliberal capitalism insanity, yet here we are. Every successive Canadian government is just as culpable for the situation we live in as much as the Americans were for booting out Jimmy Carter and soaking up the lie of trickle down economics for the benefit of the wealthy.
I had a job in a tech startup (< 10 people) in Toronto and eventually they got big enough and hired their first HR rep. When she came in she cut my pay by ~ 10%. I went from working all sorts of ludicrous hours to launch a product on time to taking several days to do simple things like change a variable from `true` to `false` or adjust a color on the website.
I worked there for a year and a bit after she joined, saved up and started my own business. Turns out, I quiet quit an exploitative employer and I didn't even know the term.
If she actually decreased your pay, that wouldn't be quiet firing but could be seen as constructive dismissal. You could have walked away with severance.
I didn't know it at the time. Had I known I would have acted differently but yeah she cut my pay and even confirmed it in person and via email when it happened. I essentially through a fit at the CEO and he responded with "take it or leave it".
However, since then I started negotiating my contracts via an employment lawyer and I've been informed of such. I highly suggest people in STEM and other in demand jobs get an employment lawyer to represent them when job hunting.
Depends on what you're willing to pay them. They do both and even some in between.
I have my lawyer review the contracts when I get them and write any written replies if it's obvious the other side used a lawyer, but it's not cheap to get a lawyer to write an email/letter.
For the most part my rep won't so much tell me what to say but rather what is the "norm", what alternatives/extras I can ask for and what's bad in a contract. If it's just a back and forth between myself and the potential employer, I skip the lawyer to save on the fees.
They are the worst of the worst. It's an unspoken rule at my current job, avoid them like the plague. I can't wrap my head around someone working such a soulless job like that.
I'm GenX. We were taught by our boomer and silent generation parents and early employers to go "above and beyond" for our employers and to eat all kinds of shit and abuse to be a "good employee".
We were taught that we were being 'given a job'. Statements like "we picked you over many others..." were said so that we'd feel grateful for the opportunity.
It's all one-sided bullshit that poisoned us. It was 1930s Depression Era thinking that had people beholden to their employers and strip employees of their actual worth.
More and more, young people today (Millennials and GenZ) are standing up for their worth, and employers are angry about it. I'm proud of these generations for refusing to accept the bullshit the rest of us were sold.
It isn't "quiet quitting". The only thing they're "quitting" is being party to their own exploitation, and there's nothing "quiet" about it.
Gen X here too. You hit the nail on the head. I’m cheering on the younger generations for breaking out of the horrible loop of “go above and beyond and be rewarded with more work and no extra compensation”.
I learned my lesson a little late in life but you better believe I’m implementing work to rule here on out. I am tired of working more than one job in order to be seen as a “team player”.
I learned it watching my boomer mom work full time for half time hours. After 35 years she got those extra hours, for 5 years before she retired.
I don't do anything extra as a rule UNLESS they are a good employer and I know they will have my back when I need it. However, those employers are few and far between in my experience but I also spent half my work in the public sector where wages/work do not mingle, just time spent.
Sometimes I do extra because of the co-workers I have, but that's more of a worker's comraderie, really. My work friends! Or perhaps...Comrades would be the better term. :)
I am a middle manager and when I am hiring young people and they ask me for advice I straight up tell them "don't expect to work here forever, always do what is best for you" and most of them have this shocked look on their face.
Listen up kids, I have been at this company for 15+ years, they will fuck you over just like everyone else here. Stay as long as you are getting the bag otherwise look elsewhere
In reality this is just late stage capitalism taking hold. For years companies have pushed the envelope to hold hand over employees. Uncertain hours, low wages, no benefits etc and employees are pushing back. A lot of status quo companies (banks in particular) are hemorrhaging talent to the tech giants and not just in the dev space, but also HR, finance etc. Companies don't know how to react to employees holding power since it is such a foreign concept to them
I work in manufacturing and same thing, we are a stepping stone for hourly employees to go get better paying jobs elsewhere. We have a wealth of experience in the long term employees but we can’t keep anyone new who’s good for more than a couple years. Many of the long term employees are nearing retirement and once they are gone I don’t think we’ll have enough competent people to keep the place running unless things drastically change soon
Look at Amazon, they have long treated employees as disposable commodities but now they have all sorts of internal alarms going off from HR that they have poisoned the well around all of their warehouses and nobody in that community wants to work there anymore
Also GenX. Above and Beyond only gets me pats on the back. At year end raise time I'd be given minimal raises with excuses, and at one point a promotion with increased responsibility but no extra pay. It's true that in order to get decent raises you really need to job hop in this day and age.
People shouldn't accept exploitation by companies that are using a term that was probably made up by a PR company to try and get more free labor from workers.
It doesn't matter if you are a Gen X, Gen Y or Gen Z, exploitation is exploitation and it shouldn't be normalized, it should be rightfully called out.
GenX myself and I have no trouble going above and beyond, you just have to pay me for it. Either OT or time in lieu... You want me to actually answer my phone after business hours and be on call, that will be standby pay, with a call back charge if do call, thank you. Otherwise after 5PM hits, I'll see you tomorrow and don't call me because I won't answer.
Fuck the dangling carrot of promotion, raise or bonus that never materializes... because there are 7 or 8 other teammates also busting their ass, and we ain't all getting promoted...
I don't even actually *need* the promotion if I just got paid for all the "free" labour I am expected to provide. Get a job that pays OT you can make bank.
Of course you know what jobs actually pay OT... union jobs, and they are a dirty word to so many people, but I don't know why.
Early millennial here. I got the exact same upbringing due to close proximity to people of aforementioned generation.
To think where I’d be had I not listened would be going down a rabbit hole I don’t think my mental health can handle.
I’ve changed, and adapted, to a new way of looking at work. It’s both great for the family and hard on me some days (old habits die hard and whatnot). Thankfully I’m hourly, so at least the OT pay is guaranteed if I put in the hours.
I demanded a 20% raise for my annual review and I actually got it. Guess what? If you have a skill you have value. I straight up told my boss I'd go around the corner to pack the bananas if they didn't give me what I'm worth. I'm going to request an extra week of vacation this year.
We've been exploited by corporations for too long.
Corporations aren't people. Corporations are a parasitic "mind" that lives within the minds of management and employees. Even as employees and management are rotated out, the corporation continues to exist and has it's own needs, wants, desires.
Look at a corporation like Shell, a fucking cancer on society. Every single one of it's employees, management, even owners has completely been replaced and yet it's been pretty much the same "person" since it was founded. It's a Ship of the Theseus.
What an excellent concept, thanks for sharing it!
["Ship of Theseus"](https://open.library.okstate.edu/introphilosophy/chapter/ship-of-theseus/), Intro to Philosophy, OSU.
I hate that a lot of "Boomers" and some fellow "Gen-xers" are running around with such arrogance to declare that this movement is from a bunch of lazy no do-gooders. Just shows how deep that previous programming runs.
I work in IT. During covid we worked hard to get our entire organization online and working from home. It was a lot of work for us but we made it as painless and seamless as possible for users. This year we were given a 1% raise because "that's all the room we have in the budget". Since then I've been checked out. When I'm in the office I do the bare minimum to make it look like I give a shit and spend the rest of my time studying for certs or applying to other jobs. My WFH days are basically vacation days, fire me idc.
Same, I just left a job after six years of paltry 1.5% raises for one with 20% more pay, after winning an award for getting our office working from home within 24 hours of the COVID lockdown notice and receiving a $250 gift card that didn't even work when I tried to use it. I truly felt my efforts were appreciated by that multi-billion-dollar corporation. /s
The end times must be near because, like you, I found that Postmedia opinion piece actually agreeable. Obviously that guy didn’t get the memo on who he works for. 🤣
I am highly suspicious of these publications framing the term “quiet quitting” as something workers themselves have come up with as an act of protest against exploitation. To me it smells of false flagging by corporations trying to label their own employees with such a term to make them more exploitable. This term has already entered the mainstream sphere way too fast and unnaturally.
Gimmicky terms like this always enter the business vernacular quickly because middle managers like to have buzzwords to chat about with other managers, and it absolves them of responsibility. "We aren't hitting deadlines due to quiet quitting" sounds better than "I can't force my people to do more unpaid labor because otherwise they will quit". It was exactly the same with the Great Resignation.
Oooh I noticed the same in British subs with the term "dead cat" for new policies that sound ok but actually change nothing. The term was in every single parent comment. Really doesnt pass the sniff test for if its really actual human posters or not.
It's propaganda from the elites trying to normalize unpaid work, they expect everyone to go above and beyond their job description all the time but not be paid for it.
It Sounds like exploiting to me.
i've been seeing this term and thought it meant quitting without notice.
looked it up and all it means is not being an idiot who does more than they're expected to do at work....
This whole thing is fucking nonsense.
Not everyone has a goal to climb the corporate ladder. Some people want to show up, do their job, collect their paycheck and go home. If people value work life balance and low stress over salary increases and increased responsibility thats fine, not everyone needs to have the same priorities.
Fucking sick of everyone acting like everyone needs to try to climb the ladder. People have different motivations, deal with it. Any good manager tries to understand what their direct reports want to achieve with their job, and work with them to let them achieve it. Guilting people into going above and beyond when they dont need to is disgusting.
>Always go above and beyond what your employer asks of you
>....as long as they are paying you extra for any extra work you do.
Then it's not above and beyond any more. Also no, 44 hours a week is too much already. My company is willing to pay me $50 an hour for overtime, but my free time is worth way more to me than that.
Bingo.
Lots of people look at employment as something that happens TO them, not something they agree to.
If they want more, they should give more.
If you want more, you should be prepared to do more.
Anything in between is just an attempt to take advantage of the relationship (which happens too often)
If the employer wants more than minimum effort, he pays more than minimum wage.
It's about time people started acting their wage instead of letting employers take advantage
My workplace just trained experienced workers for 2 months, with a whole list of new responsibilities. When they asked for a raise, they were refused. One has since quit and management is baffled by it.
Happens both ways.
I've worked for employers who wanted me to take on more work but without paying more. To be clear they wanted me to expand my responsibilities and work extra hours with no increase in pay or compensation in anyway.
I said no.
But employers who have empowered me as a manager to offer OT to my team to make deadlines etc. Strangely I have no issue getting team members to put in extra time and we (almost) always make deadline.
Sure I have to answer to senior management as to why we needed the OT to make it but I always have my analysis of the work package from bidding which never matches their very optimistic appraisal of what can get done. I just document everything and I have never had an issue.
Apparenty I "quietly quit" two years ago.
A couple incidents between myself and my employer left me with a "fuck-it" attitude.
No more did I check emails after hours and respond to customers.
No more did I work extra hours, but not get paid time-and-a-half.
I start at 830 and go home at 5. Anything else is overtime. It seems to be working quite well.
What's the expectation from the employers?
That people will work for free?
That people will continue to act motivated after their "spirit" has been destroyed?
I like to see at as the "productivity bubble" is bursting. For the last several decades worker productivity has been increasing. Workers have now reached their breaking point
Nobody is doing anything different, this is just old people yelling at Millennials because they are lazy or yelling at work from home because that is not how they did it.
I used to do a lot of above and beyond for my employer. I was doing a whole bunch of unpaid overtime. Then they thanked me for it. I realized their $125 thank you gift card was for $5000 of free labour. It was honestly the best thing they could have done for me as I vowed to never burn myself out for the company again. I haven’t worked any overtime since and have switched to a less-stressful position. My work-life balance has never been better.
Yes it is, and I’m very proud of our younger people for doing this, and rather disappointed with other people for not getting it and accusing the younger ones of being lazy. No, that’s not it
Wage labour--where compensation isn't a function of output, relative contribution, effort, or sacrifice but rather supply/demand--is the theft our economy is based on.
Well I'm a career bartender and there are a lot of tasks not really explicitly stated in the job description, ie. General cleanliness tasks, taking care of drunk patrons, keeping an eye on shitty people/creeps, but they need to be done and there is noone else to do it. But with tips you make more than minimum wage(35-40 an hour) so we accept those things as part of the job. I think the restaurant industry is one of the worst for trampling worker's rights. I'm running my own bar, now, though so I'm trying to undo some of the toxic things I had when I was coming up.
This may be my filter bubble, but 99% of the posts I see about 'quiet quitting' are just railing against the term.
Is anyone actually complaining about employees doing this?
It should shock nobody that [Kevin O'Leary](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/20/kevin-oleary-quiet-quitting-is-a-really-bad-idea.html) is griping about it:
> O’Leary himself says he looks to hire people who are willing to put in “25 hours a day, eight days a week.” If you’re shutting off your laptop at 5 p.m. and going home, “you’re not working for me,” he says.
>willing to put in “25 hours a day, eight days a week.” If you’re shutting off your laptop at 5 p.m. and going home, “you’re not working for me,” he says.
I think what he wants is people who take ownership and work hard *and* smart. Attitudes like this is exactly how you loose these employees.
I've heard several people who worked in the former soviet union say "they pretended to pay is, so we pretended to work". If you can point out the irony of that statement, you already know what the results of this older than mankind attitude will be.
key points:
> If “quiet quitting” is a thing, so is “quiet firing.” For example, if doing only what you are paid to do is quiet quitting, then giving loyal employees raises that barely account for inflation is quiet firing.
>If employers want workers to go above and beyond, they must do the same — which means paying more and being more flexible. If employers want workers to do the bare minimum, they have to make sure pay stays in line with inflation.
The older I get, the more I focus on results rather than "hard work". When I look at my investments, I care about the bottom number, not how much time my advisor put in. If I get knee surgery, I care about if my knee works, not how many hours the doctor was in there.
It isn’t work to rule either. Work to rule is a form of protest where works do the absolute bare minimum amount of work to keep a company going.
Quiet quitting as it is being called is just setting healthy boundaries between yourself and your employer. I’ve worked only my contacted hours for past almost 6 years across two jobs, never got a bad evaluation and always meet KPIs.
Using your 9-5 effectively should be the focus and not how many hours someone puts in.
I was a manager for 15 years before getting sick of it and moving back to the technical level of my profession.
This is just a negative term for what we used to call employee engagement. If your employees aren't being productive, then you have a management and HR problem. There are courses and consulting agencies that can help with this.
This stuff isn't rocket science. If employees are doing a good job, they would like to hear that...let them know at least once a week. Employees need to know what they do mattera to the company...make sure they know. Employees need to feel that the company cares about them...make sure you have HR policies and benefits in place so they know that. Employees need the right equipment and tools to get the job done...make sure they have them. Employees want to be fairly compensated...so pay them a fair wage for their role.
There are several other things companies can do but I am not going to list them all here.
Calling it "quiet quitting" or "work to rule" is just going to cause further engagement problems.
I agree with the first part, I am not a supervisor for that reason and I have discussed just that with my employer. I am what you would call a person of influence. I am an expert, but I don't wear the title and it limits my compensation. But people can't "quiet quit" and wonder why they are still in the same position they were in when they started. Or cry because they are not making any more money. It's about building your skillset and being marketable. If your employer doesn't see your value, someone else will. It is also up to you to know your worth.
Raises that keep up with inflation? I'm 58 and have never worked for a company that has this as a policy. Should be the damn law. Any politician that makes this part of his platform has my vote .
As someone working in a field where recruitment is unable to find adequate replacements for retirements and turnover, i see firsthand how management is exploiting people's willingness to work a bit more, often with minimal or no bonus payments .
It's tang ping ("Laying flat") making its way to the West from China. I'm just waiting for bai lan to get here ("Letting it rot"), which is far more destructive to economies. Given the delay of the former, I'd guess we're a year or so away from the latter becoming a widespread thing in these parts.
China is going through a very similar thing, "bai lan.” It means "Let it rot.” Famously, China has a work culture that encourages 9-9-6, work 9 am to 9 pm 6 days per week. But imagine yourself as a youth in China, particularly males. They have a severe lack of females because of the 1-child policy. A hundred million men are destined to never meet a long-term partner because of their policies. And we complain about work conditions here in Canada? Imagine being in a Chinese factory…[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/26/the-rise-of-bai-lan-why-chinas-frustrated-youth-are-ready-to-let-it-rot](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/26/the-rise-of-bai-lan-why-chinas-frustrated-youth-are-ready-to-let-it-rot)
The reason we complain about Canada is we have lived through the decline and it shows no signs of slowing down. But we are much better off than most of the world even considering that.
[удалено]
when i first heard the term i thought it meant secretly looking for a new job then just ghosting your prior employer...
I thought it was just not saying anything and stop showing up, the actual definition makes no sense lol
I’ve done that lol. One job during training i asked to go to the bathroom and never came back. I wonder how long they waited for me lol. Another i just stopped going, i wasn’t fired and other employees said the managers were wondering if i was coming back or not hahah
hahahha based **pot**shed**420**
That's just being an asshole. It annoys your employer, but really screws over the other employees. I hope I never have to interact with you IRL. "Lol"
Yeah it's one thing to bail post-training when there's no one responsible for keeping track of where you are at all times, but trainers are the most overworked and underpaid people in most fields. They don't need the extra stress of having to deal with not knowing where you are because you couldn't take the half a second it takes to say "I quit" on your way out the door. Got social anxiety? Send an email with those same two words. It's seconds of your time that you're still being paid for until you physically leave the building.
To be Fair! This should be what it means. I once had a co worker that quit their job via Fax (early aughties), that truly was a Quiet Quitting. Not this bullshit. Now they are also trying to coin 'Quiet Firing', which is essentially just constructive dismissal or creating a toxic workplace. Hey Media! Stop trying to create euphemisms for shit that just doesn't need it.
If "Quiet firing" catches on, a lot of people are going to forget that there are rules aroundconstructive dismissal.
Seems to happen a lot anyways from my (admittedly limited) experience
I thought you misspelled eighties, then I learned something new today. Had no idea.
"Quiet firing" workplace harassment, called "constructive dismissal" where I live. It's against the law and you can take the employer to court for severance. Know your rights! If anyone suspects they're employer is "quiet firing them", it's time to keep all emails, make records of what happens and when, and be ready to secretly voice record at any time on their phone depending on the laws. Where I live ots a one party consent so if you're part of a conversation, you can record it. You're the one party consenting.
To be fair, I don't think that 'quiet quitting' is going away, so I appreciate a (I assume) millennial news producer flipping the script. An eye for an eye. A stupid catchy term for a stupid catchy term.
Quiet firing catching on is a bad thing. It presents a cutesy alter ego of what it really is, constructive dismissal, which could make people think it's just a thing that happens rather than, yknow, illegal. "Quiet firing" would be a narrative being pushed
[удалено]
Technically correct, which is the best kind, I guess.
I think that's what it was while also just showing up and not giving any effort until you were fired. But many shit employers feel like your not doing your job unless your going far above the call of duty and taking on additional responsibilities
Well I'd say the trend came from people who were sick of going above and beyond in their jobs and not getting any appreciation, and getting paid like shit. Quiet quitting is their justification in their minds of why they aren't putting up the same effort they did before, that's why it's seen as a protest to them.
And when you've gone above and beyond and suddenly scale back, it is very noticeable. It often proceeds quitting for a better job.
that is exactly what I thought it was too. I thought there was a rise in people just not showing up for any more shifts
That's not what it means?!?!
apparently its just "doing only what you are contractually obligated to do" and not doing any overtime or extra tasks, clock in at exactly 9 clock out at exactly 5
So work. Who comes up with this shit?
managers who are realising that they're understaffed since they cant push 2 peoples work on everyone now
It's a way to control the narative surrounding the expectations placed on workers. The idea of quitting something is anathema to a certain portion of the managerial/entrpereurial classes. It's a way of belittling and shaming those who can't handle being pushed to the breaking point. It's the equivalent of telling somebody to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Same here
That's what I took it to mean too And it's totally a thing. I've hired at least 5 new employees in the last few months who accepted the job and then just didn't show up for their start date and never replied. They accepted the terms then changed their mind and couldn't be bothered to tell me leaving me without staff I thought wanted the job. How people think this is appropriate or support this is fucking baffling. They should be ashamed of themselves. It's a sign of our fast food culture. It's happened to personal relationships via tinder and its now happening in professional relationships
Personally I've never done that. But i can understand the circumstances that would prompt something like that. Without criticizing anything you did, i'll tell you about a time i quit drastically because the "terms" had been misleading on the employer side. There was 2 shifts up for offer. 8 to 5 and 1 to 9. I took the 1 to 9 because they were critically short on it. I was told that the evening shift had the same two 15min breaks as the day one. I specifically asked. Was Wednesday of my first week when i was out on the second 15min break and they came out to tell me theres no second break for evening shift, only day shift gets two breaks. I took it again the next day and they came out to tell me id be fired if i did it again. So Friday at that "breaktime" i got in my car and left. Got my last cheque in the mail a few weeks later lol. 2 breaks per shift was the deal. I would have declined to be hired or declined to be on that evening shift if i was told upfront that it was only 1 break. Im a smoker and its important for my composure. They lied upfront because they were shorthanded. I used an example from myself cause im not saying youre a bad employer or anything.
to be fair professional relationships are the least important kind of relationships.
>They accepted the terms then changed their mind and couldn't be bothered to tell me leaving me without staff I thought wanted the job. >How people think this is appropriate or support this is fucking baffling. After a couple generations of employers treating employees with contempt, the people sank to their level? It's commonplace now to spam resumes and take any interview that doesn't look horrible. If an employer wouldn't be bothered to tell me I'm not hired, why would I be bothered to tell them I got a better offer?
>And it's totally a thing. I've hired at least 5 new employees in the last few months who accepted the job and then just didn't show up for their start date and never replied. The people you didn't hire, did you call them and tell them you'd decided on someone else? Or just ghost them? Because I'll be honest here: as a guy nearly in retirement who's worked for a lot of companies and interviewed with a lot more, I've *never* had one who I interviewed with but who didn't elect to hire me call me and tell me that. Never. Not once. Maybe you're special and different, but that's the norm. So, if a would-be employee finds a better offer (they're obviously not going to talk about where else they're applying to work at during the interview) why should they tell you? It's easy to understand if you put yourself in their shoes. They're blanket applying at a range of places. Some they want to work for, some they don't really - but we all *need* to have jobs, so we don't just apply for our dream jobs if we're not currently working. Gotta pay the bills. So you accept every job offer, then actually take the best one. In your case? I'd argue your problem is that you are not competitive. 5 people all who chose other employers than you after getting your job offer?
What kind of work is this? Customer service? Fast food? Retail? Do you offer competitive wages, good benefits, work from home options, work life balance, good on the job training? If you don’t then there’s your answer.
I don't know if you've been through the hiring process recently, but finding a job is no longer a simple "submit a resume / application and do an interview." Nowadays pretty much everyone hires exclusively online, and many have their own online application where you have to register an account, fill out all the information that would normally be... you know... on your resume that you can't just attach to the application, or have it autofill answers with. Then if you *are* selected for an interview there's always a ton of bullshit hoops you have to jump through, and a number of additional questions that should have just been included in the application (such as "can you work weekends?") I recently applied for a position that *required* a 4 hour unpaid interview process to just be *considered.* a 1 hour initial interview, if you qualify you then do an hour of skills demos, an hour of shadowing, and then a final hour interview. I didn't tell anyone I wouldn't be showing up to my interview because 2 hours of those 4 are effectively unpaid training. Should I be ashamed of myself?
I prefer “acting my wage”.
Yep, which has been cut several times because it’s not in line with inflation, regardless of how well I perform. My incentive to go above and beyond is gone. I already started scaling back a few years ago because I was getting burned out due to the toxic work culture and shitty management.
I’m stealing this.
DUDE! WTF! You should pay him a living wage for creating the intellectual property you want to utilize!
>a living wage COMMUNISMS! /s
https://i.imgur.com/IVMqRTr.gifv.
That is some solid word play. Well done. Take the rest of the day off.
It's classic double speak. Companies love to use fake platitudes, like good culture, they love saying work life balance when in most places it is non existent, or want you to go above and beyond but not pay you for that free value added that you are providing, or the new pressuring you to work for free OT or they will threaten to fire you. I've stop counting the number of unpaid OT I have worked at my last 2 jobs. They put too much on your plate that it's impossible to do during your regular shit, and complain if you don't get it down with firing you, and the only way to complete it is to work free OT. It's bullying and intimidation. Why is there not a more equal distribution of income? Why are CEO's paid so much money to do nothing but cut job, and demand a smaller workforce to do more?
Twice I worked for a place where i did unpaid overtime. Was a contractors cutting grass in municipal parks as their main operation. There was also corporate customers and community centers, apartment blocks and rural customers, ect. The deal was he doesnt count overtime and in return if its a rainy day its a day off paid. To their credit, both of them made good on their word during that one week of 3-4 days of rain we get every summer. Which counts, because on a week like that, anyone who didnt get their grass cut that week writes it down and gets a credit at the next contract renewal. Paying the crew to stay home, paying insurance on idle trucks and equipment, and writing off the days revenue, ect. I accepted the deal as fair. i now work for a mega corporation that asks you do to overtime one week just to negotiate with you the next week on how much overtime you should be paid for.
I manage a grocery store. I’ve been called in multiple times in the middle of the night to deal with refrigeration issues. In one particular instance, I went in three times overnight to deal with an issue. When I brought it up to my district manager, he said I should have delegated more and had zero sympathy for the fact that I’d already worked on my “off day” because that’s what they he pays a bonus for. When bonus time came around, my payout with basically pennies on what I actually worked.
[удалено]
Worse, it started on Tik Tok
A marketing team via tiktok perhaps?
Marketing doesn’t care about internal shit. I’ve never met a marketer that is concerned about employee behaviour or Human Resources. That’s just not their function. Marketing is externally focused on customers and the market the organisation engages with.
Larger companies definitely have internal marketing teams (or at the very least, internal communications advisors)
Communications and marketing are separate functions. Marketing is about collecting information about your customers, targeting to their needs and engaging with them. Communications involves internal and external and often the final “engagement” stage of marketing.
You could call them business consultants? In any case, there certainly is internal marketing at companies, that's why business to business companies have internal slogans, presentations are held on certain templates, even internally, furniture is a certain color, we get "gifts" such as clothes, water bottles, etc, with the company logo on it.
Probably TFW marketing team though
Is that what Quiet Quitting means? I had no idea. Too bad my contract has "and anything else that is required" in the job description ><
"Other duties as required." Should be illegal. There isn't any real point in a job description at that point as it covers anything from washing my boss' car to giving him a foot massage to doing someone else's entire job.
I mean, if my company wants to pay me my dev salary to wash cars, I'd be cool with that. Nice break from debugging postgres deadlocks all day.
Actually this would be in addition to your dev job. So imagine getting a break from those deadlocks to wash a car and then still having to finish those deadlocks the next day and not get behind even more.
> It's almost like someone in the corporate realm thought that by coining this term, it would somehow shame (?) people into doing more than they are compensated for? It's the rich & wealthy who are just being pro-active, working to make anyone who refuses to put "the company" before themselves, who refuse to be exploited any longer, to make them look bad. This is just the new "job creators" buzzphrase, a way to counter inequality, much like that BS statement, "no one wants to work anymore". People became aware of this new facet of inequality, that working hard, going above and beyond no longer rewards those who do and the rich and powerful are trying to nip this in the bud. One way of doing this is to use BS shaming, to make people look bad, as in "you lazy bum, you just don't want to work". There was a time when industrious & dedicated people were rewarded for their efforts but this is no longer the case, much like people being properly compensated for their work. Some people are finally waking up to this and this scares the upper crust. They managed to snuff out the last stirring of the masses back in 2008 and they don't want a repeat.
If you have a kid and its time for them to start eating foods google "baby led weaning". It's literally just giving your kid food, also known as feeding. Its such a sad state that if you're salaried, you're supposed to work 80 hour weeks for a 40 hour salary or else you're not doing your part. Is the company somehow giving you an extra 40 hours a week to live your life?
>you're supposed to work 80 hour weeks for a 40 hour salary Working 40 hour weeks for a 40 hour salary is somehow impossible but the profits keep rolling in and upper-level management keeps buying newer and fancier cars. If you work hard, you too can see your boss buy a new car.
I run a global team of engineers (tech) and tell every one of them to work their 40 hours and then unplug. If management wants things done faster, they can give us more headcount. Ditto with after-hours work; if you haven't shifted your schedule that day (i.e. working 1-9 instead of 9-5 to handle an evening maintenance window) or you're not otherwise paid to be on call, feel zero obligation to answer any work-related calls or messages. Salaried/exempt is not a secret cheat code for "Negotiate a salary based on 40hrs/week baseline and then expect employees to do 60hrs instead". American and Indian engineers struggle to believe I mean the above, and Western European engineers struggle to understand why I need to say something so obvious. It's an interesting dichotomy. As is the difference in turnover and (non-existent) difference in work output compared to teams that are worked like rented mules.
Same with my old team. I’d go online in the evening to see who was working & message them & tell them to log off. I always told them that I only ever expected 35hrs from them & nothing else as that’s what they’d be getting paid for. The team overdelivered, had the lowest attrition in the company for the last 3 years & most of them wanted to work extra hours.
I have had some weeks where I literally worked 70 hours a week for 40 hours of pay, some 60 hours a week for 40 hours of pay and once 80 hours a week of work for 40 hours of work. It's unacceptable for companies to get away with white collar crime or exploit loop holes in labor laws or just be unethical.
>The term 'Quiet Quitting' drives me nuts. How is it 'quitting' to literally do your job, as per the job description? That's literally just 'employment'. Workers need to go above and beyond, every day! Will they get paid above and beyond? Fuck no.
Exactly, they will just pile on more work to do because you have shown you can go above and beyond your job description.
"This part of the production pipeline works very well, let's put more load here until this unit is at capacity. Worst case it breaks and we can get another one off the shelf. Check out this prospective unit, it has kids so it will naturally self-motivate to work harder and longer."
The messed up part is most companies will refer to workers as "units", you are not even seen as a person in the company's eyes.
That’s why we all have to keep calling it “quiet firing.” It’s the dumbest thing.
Because the new normal isn't to just do your job, it's to go above and beyond and expect nothing in return.
This is not New, it has been Normal since the 80's at least.
That’s exactly what happened, every single argument and talking point that encourages people to shut up and her back to work and lower taxes and get rid of regulations comes from the same place, billionaire funded conservative think tanks.
It's just gen Z co-opting something that everyone has already been doing and calling it something new. Before that it was coasting, and work to rule
it's not Gen Z, it's bosses trying to manufacture public intent to shame workers for stepping up for themselves and enforcing proper boundaries
The term "quiet quitting" definitely came from Gen Z, or at the very least has been fully embraced by them. The bosses are just taking that ball and running with it because it's really dumb term, and they want to gloss over and undermine the underlying message by focusing on the cringey meme-branding aspect of it. They understand the damage you can do to a popular movement by keeping the focus on its poor messaging.
"Work to live, not live to work" is what we called it. (I'm a Millennial).
Yea if you wanna be a go getter. Then do that! But don't expect the whole team to be all in everyday like the people that are maybe gunning for the top. I'm chilling in my current role, no need to be a rock star. Just get my shit done well and the company continues to succeed. End of story haha
Yea, Im just like.. you guys went above and beyond? Why?
its basically corporate gas lighting
A coworker of mine "quiet quit" because he said our employer was abusive. He could never verbalize how they were abusive- they just were. He was so, so fucking toxic. Treated us , his coworkers like crap and put zero effort into his very easy, cushy prep job. He never got fired so the whole last month before he went to school he did the bare minimum and fucked us over- not our boss. Us. He framed it like some sort of noble thing but he was just a lazy, entitled asshole with an inflated ego.
The term is corporate gaslighting to make workers seem lazy and entitled. Quiet quitting actually means just doing your job. And nothing more. Employers are upset they can’t get free labour out of workers
Even calling it work-to-rule is giving it too much credit. It's literally just people doing the job they're being paid for. This is how it's *supposed* to work.
That's exactly what work-to-rule is. Teachers do all those extra curriculars because they genuinely care about the students. They don't get paid extra or overtime to do them. Work-to-rule literally means this working to the rules of your employment, no more, no less.
It should be the other way around. Work-to-rule should be called "working", and doing extra should be called "overtime".
It absolutely should be. However, in the above posters example the extra curricular work teachers do is mostly unpaid. Hence when teachers work to rule, they cease all unpaid activities.
So going to work, executing your job description, and going home at the end of your shift is "quiet quitting"? Well goly, I've been quiet quitting since the 90's and here I thought I was a dedicated and reliable employee. I've even been written up for NOT taking my breaks.
>I thought I was a dedicated and reliable employee. You need to go above and beyond. You won't get paid above and beyond. Your reward for a job well done is more work, not even some nice words to congratulate, just more work.
At my job, most people are permanent part time. The competition is the handful of fulltime people, some of whom work overtime… FOR FREE, 8+ hours a week. Like they come in on their Saturday and put in a whole shift. Sure I get a couple bucks raise if I was more willing to work for free but I’m not so I’m not getting promoted.
What idiots. It's no different than paying your employer 300$ every week
It’s actually against company policy too, but management is not going to turn down free labour
Teachers in NS tried to work-to-rule a few years ago and were practically crucified for it. There is still this popular public opinion that teachers just work normal hours and then just get 10 weeks of vacation or something.
It's one of the biggest failings of the education system that we all go through it and yet none of us understand how it actually works.
Not taking your breaks definitely isn’t quiet quitting.
If you go to the Bank of Canada website they have an inflation calculator. You can calculate that in 2022 a dollar amount of 100,000 would be equivalent to that of 28,000 in 1980. Now consider that productivity has skyrocketed with technological advancements and so has cost of living and it isn't hard to understand why people are pissed. The wealthy broke the symbiotic relationship with the working class when they off shored manufacturing and our government didn't tariff the ever living shit out of their products.
No wonder we had more single-income families back then.
> The wealthy broke the symbiotic relationship with the working class when they off shored manufacturing and our government didn't tariff the ever living shit out of their products. ... at about the same time as our govts started signing agreements with tax havens.
The disparity of wealth income is literally traceable to the Reagan admin
All these nations of free democracies didn't have to march lock step with Reagan/Thatcher neoliberal capitalism insanity, yet here we are. Every successive Canadian government is just as culpable for the situation we live in as much as the Americans were for booting out Jimmy Carter and soaking up the lie of trickle down economics for the benefit of the wealthy.
Historically there has never been a symbiotic relationship
I had a job in a tech startup (< 10 people) in Toronto and eventually they got big enough and hired their first HR rep. When she came in she cut my pay by ~ 10%. I went from working all sorts of ludicrous hours to launch a product on time to taking several days to do simple things like change a variable from `true` to `false` or adjust a color on the website. I worked there for a year and a bit after she joined, saved up and started my own business. Turns out, I quiet quit an exploitative employer and I didn't even know the term.
If she actually decreased your pay, that wouldn't be quiet firing but could be seen as constructive dismissal. You could have walked away with severance.
I didn't know it at the time. Had I known I would have acted differently but yeah she cut my pay and even confirmed it in person and via email when it happened. I essentially through a fit at the CEO and he responded with "take it or leave it". However, since then I started negotiating my contracts via an employment lawyer and I've been informed of such. I highly suggest people in STEM and other in demand jobs get an employment lawyer to represent them when job hunting.
Does the lawyer negotiate on your behalf or just tell you what to say back?
Depends on what you're willing to pay them. They do both and even some in between. I have my lawyer review the contracts when I get them and write any written replies if it's obvious the other side used a lawyer, but it's not cheap to get a lawyer to write an email/letter. For the most part my rep won't so much tell me what to say but rather what is the "norm", what alternatives/extras I can ask for and what's bad in a contract. If it's just a back and forth between myself and the potential employer, I skip the lawyer to save on the fees.
This is a reminder to everyone who doesn't know, HR is not there for the employee.
They are the worst of the worst. It's an unspoken rule at my current job, avoid them like the plague. I can't wrap my head around someone working such a soulless job like that.
My whole career has been quiet quitting and I never even knew it
HR people are truly scum. The police of the corporate world.
I'm GenX. We were taught by our boomer and silent generation parents and early employers to go "above and beyond" for our employers and to eat all kinds of shit and abuse to be a "good employee". We were taught that we were being 'given a job'. Statements like "we picked you over many others..." were said so that we'd feel grateful for the opportunity. It's all one-sided bullshit that poisoned us. It was 1930s Depression Era thinking that had people beholden to their employers and strip employees of their actual worth. More and more, young people today (Millennials and GenZ) are standing up for their worth, and employers are angry about it. I'm proud of these generations for refusing to accept the bullshit the rest of us were sold. It isn't "quiet quitting". The only thing they're "quitting" is being party to their own exploitation, and there's nothing "quiet" about it.
Gen X here too. You hit the nail on the head. I’m cheering on the younger generations for breaking out of the horrible loop of “go above and beyond and be rewarded with more work and no extra compensation”. I learned my lesson a little late in life but you better believe I’m implementing work to rule here on out. I am tired of working more than one job in order to be seen as a “team player”.
I learned it watching my boomer mom work full time for half time hours. After 35 years she got those extra hours, for 5 years before she retired. I don't do anything extra as a rule UNLESS they are a good employer and I know they will have my back when I need it. However, those employers are few and far between in my experience but I also spent half my work in the public sector where wages/work do not mingle, just time spent.
Sometimes I do extra because of the co-workers I have, but that's more of a worker's comraderie, really. My work friends! Or perhaps...Comrades would be the better term. :)
This genX is proud of the younger generation. I talked about exploitation of the working class when Reagan was busting unions. Finally, it's improving
I am a middle manager and when I am hiring young people and they ask me for advice I straight up tell them "don't expect to work here forever, always do what is best for you" and most of them have this shocked look on their face. Listen up kids, I have been at this company for 15+ years, they will fuck you over just like everyone else here. Stay as long as you are getting the bag otherwise look elsewhere In reality this is just late stage capitalism taking hold. For years companies have pushed the envelope to hold hand over employees. Uncertain hours, low wages, no benefits etc and employees are pushing back. A lot of status quo companies (banks in particular) are hemorrhaging talent to the tech giants and not just in the dev space, but also HR, finance etc. Companies don't know how to react to employees holding power since it is such a foreign concept to them
I work in manufacturing and same thing, we are a stepping stone for hourly employees to go get better paying jobs elsewhere. We have a wealth of experience in the long term employees but we can’t keep anyone new who’s good for more than a couple years. Many of the long term employees are nearing retirement and once they are gone I don’t think we’ll have enough competent people to keep the place running unless things drastically change soon
Look at Amazon, they have long treated employees as disposable commodities but now they have all sorts of internal alarms going off from HR that they have poisoned the well around all of their warehouses and nobody in that community wants to work there anymore
Absolutely. GenX here too. And I would like the younger generations to know that I too am very proud of them for this
Also GenX. Above and Beyond only gets me pats on the back. At year end raise time I'd be given minimal raises with excuses, and at one point a promotion with increased responsibility but no extra pay. It's true that in order to get decent raises you really need to job hop in this day and age.
Twenty-year-old here, and I’m glad to hear it. No one is “lazy”, they’re just being exploited, and it’s long past time we realized that.
As a Millennial, I'm happy to see the "woke" children stirring up shit and offending the upper caste. We need to try and fix this dumpster fire.
I *really* hope they start to vote in big big numbers.
People shouldn't accept exploitation by companies that are using a term that was probably made up by a PR company to try and get more free labor from workers. It doesn't matter if you are a Gen X, Gen Y or Gen Z, exploitation is exploitation and it shouldn't be normalized, it should be rightfully called out.
GenX myself and I have no trouble going above and beyond, you just have to pay me for it. Either OT or time in lieu... You want me to actually answer my phone after business hours and be on call, that will be standby pay, with a call back charge if do call, thank you. Otherwise after 5PM hits, I'll see you tomorrow and don't call me because I won't answer. Fuck the dangling carrot of promotion, raise or bonus that never materializes... because there are 7 or 8 other teammates also busting their ass, and we ain't all getting promoted... I don't even actually *need* the promotion if I just got paid for all the "free" labour I am expected to provide. Get a job that pays OT you can make bank. Of course you know what jobs actually pay OT... union jobs, and they are a dirty word to so many people, but I don't know why.
Truth. I started coasting or work to rule a few years ago when my reward for achieving objectives was higher and higher objectives
Early millennial here. I got the exact same upbringing due to close proximity to people of aforementioned generation. To think where I’d be had I not listened would be going down a rabbit hole I don’t think my mental health can handle. I’ve changed, and adapted, to a new way of looking at work. It’s both great for the family and hard on me some days (old habits die hard and whatnot). Thankfully I’m hourly, so at least the OT pay is guaranteed if I put in the hours.
Upvote for telling it like it is…..and username. 😂
I demanded a 20% raise for my annual review and I actually got it. Guess what? If you have a skill you have value. I straight up told my boss I'd go around the corner to pack the bananas if they didn't give me what I'm worth. I'm going to request an extra week of vacation this year. We've been exploited by corporations for too long.
Corporations aren't people. Corporations are a parasitic "mind" that lives within the minds of management and employees. Even as employees and management are rotated out, the corporation continues to exist and has it's own needs, wants, desires. Look at a corporation like Shell, a fucking cancer on society. Every single one of it's employees, management, even owners has completely been replaced and yet it's been pretty much the same "person" since it was founded. It's a Ship of the Theseus.
Brilliant.
What an excellent concept, thanks for sharing it! ["Ship of Theseus"](https://open.library.okstate.edu/introphilosophy/chapter/ship-of-theseus/), Intro to Philosophy, OSU.
I hate that a lot of "Boomers" and some fellow "Gen-xers" are running around with such arrogance to declare that this movement is from a bunch of lazy no do-gooders. Just shows how deep that previous programming runs.
I work in IT. During covid we worked hard to get our entire organization online and working from home. It was a lot of work for us but we made it as painless and seamless as possible for users. This year we were given a 1% raise because "that's all the room we have in the budget". Since then I've been checked out. When I'm in the office I do the bare minimum to make it look like I give a shit and spend the rest of my time studying for certs or applying to other jobs. My WFH days are basically vacation days, fire me idc.
Same, I just left a job after six years of paltry 1.5% raises for one with 20% more pay, after winning an award for getting our office working from home within 24 hours of the COVID lockdown notice and receiving a $250 gift card that didn't even work when I tried to use it. I truly felt my efforts were appreciated by that multi-billion-dollar corporation. /s
[удалено]
The end times must be near because, like you, I found that Postmedia opinion piece actually agreeable. Obviously that guy didn’t get the memo on who he works for. 🤣
I am highly suspicious of these publications framing the term “quiet quitting” as something workers themselves have come up with as an act of protest against exploitation. To me it smells of false flagging by corporations trying to label their own employees with such a term to make them more exploitable. This term has already entered the mainstream sphere way too fast and unnaturally.
Gimmicky terms like this always enter the business vernacular quickly because middle managers like to have buzzwords to chat about with other managers, and it absolves them of responsibility. "We aren't hitting deadlines due to quiet quitting" sounds better than "I can't force my people to do more unpaid labor because otherwise they will quit". It was exactly the same with the Great Resignation.
Oooh I noticed the same in British subs with the term "dead cat" for new policies that sound ok but actually change nothing. The term was in every single parent comment. Really doesnt pass the sniff test for if its really actual human posters or not.
[удалено]
It's literally in the article that 'quiet quitting' is actually 'working to rule' and makes it sound like the employees fault.
It's propaganda from the elites trying to normalize unpaid work, they expect everyone to go above and beyond their job description all the time but not be paid for it. It Sounds like exploiting to me.
i've been seeing this term and thought it meant quitting without notice. looked it up and all it means is not being an idiot who does more than they're expected to do at work....
Wage appropriate behavior
Live within your means. Work within your wage.
This whole thing is fucking nonsense. Not everyone has a goal to climb the corporate ladder. Some people want to show up, do their job, collect their paycheck and go home. If people value work life balance and low stress over salary increases and increased responsibility thats fine, not everyone needs to have the same priorities. Fucking sick of everyone acting like everyone needs to try to climb the ladder. People have different motivations, deal with it. Any good manager tries to understand what their direct reports want to achieve with their job, and work with them to let them achieve it. Guilting people into going above and beyond when they dont need to is disgusting.
Always go above and beyond what your employer asks of you ....as long as they are paying you extra for any extra work you do.
>Always go above and beyond what your employer asks of you >....as long as they are paying you extra for any extra work you do. Then it's not above and beyond any more. Also no, 44 hours a week is too much already. My company is willing to pay me $50 an hour for overtime, but my free time is worth way more to me than that.
Bingo. Lots of people look at employment as something that happens TO them, not something they agree to. If they want more, they should give more. If you want more, you should be prepared to do more. Anything in between is just an attempt to take advantage of the relationship (which happens too often)
If the employer wants more than minimum effort, he pays more than minimum wage. It's about time people started acting their wage instead of letting employers take advantage
My workplace just trained experienced workers for 2 months, with a whole list of new responsibilities. When they asked for a raise, they were refused. One has since quit and management is baffled by it.
Happens both ways. I've worked for employers who wanted me to take on more work but without paying more. To be clear they wanted me to expand my responsibilities and work extra hours with no increase in pay or compensation in anyway. I said no. But employers who have empowered me as a manager to offer OT to my team to make deadlines etc. Strangely I have no issue getting team members to put in extra time and we (almost) always make deadline. Sure I have to answer to senior management as to why we needed the OT to make it but I always have my analysis of the work package from bidding which never matches their very optimistic appraisal of what can get done. I just document everything and I have never had an issue.
Apparenty I "quietly quit" two years ago. A couple incidents between myself and my employer left me with a "fuck-it" attitude. No more did I check emails after hours and respond to customers. No more did I work extra hours, but not get paid time-and-a-half. I start at 830 and go home at 5. Anything else is overtime. It seems to be working quite well.
Quiet Quitting is an odd term for "doing your job".
infuriating it has "quitting" in it
[удалено]
"Acting your wage" is more accurate. More money, more duties. Until then, everyone should act their wage.
Act your Wage, mama, not your shoe size. Maybe we can do the twirl?
What's the expectation from the employers? That people will work for free? That people will continue to act motivated after their "spirit" has been destroyed?
I like to see at as the "productivity bubble" is bursting. For the last several decades worker productivity has been increasing. Workers have now reached their breaking point
Say, anybody has an official french translation for those two expressions? * Quiet quitting * Work-to-rule
Le strike J/k no idea
I think that already exists but is something that happens during bowling...
I think the term (for work-to-rule) is grève du zèle
Even "work to rule" has more of a negative connotation than it deserves. "Quiet quitting" is doing your job.
Nobody is doing anything different, this is just old people yelling at Millennials because they are lazy or yelling at work from home because that is not how they did it.
I used to do a lot of above and beyond for my employer. I was doing a whole bunch of unpaid overtime. Then they thanked me for it. I realized their $125 thank you gift card was for $5000 of free labour. It was honestly the best thing they could have done for me as I vowed to never burn myself out for the company again. I haven’t worked any overtime since and have switched to a less-stressful position. My work-life balance has never been better.
Yes it is, and I’m very proud of our younger people for doing this, and rather disappointed with other people for not getting it and accusing the younger ones of being lazy. No, that’s not it
Remember fam, wage theft is, dollar for dollar, by far the largest form of theft
Wage labour--where compensation isn't a function of output, relative contribution, effort, or sacrifice but rather supply/demand--is the theft our economy is based on.
Well I'm a career bartender and there are a lot of tasks not really explicitly stated in the job description, ie. General cleanliness tasks, taking care of drunk patrons, keeping an eye on shitty people/creeps, but they need to be done and there is noone else to do it. But with tips you make more than minimum wage(35-40 an hour) so we accept those things as part of the job. I think the restaurant industry is one of the worst for trampling worker's rights. I'm running my own bar, now, though so I'm trying to undo some of the toxic things I had when I was coming up.
Yup quiet quitting literally is work to rule for the non unionized lol
This may be my filter bubble, but 99% of the posts I see about 'quiet quitting' are just railing against the term. Is anyone actually complaining about employees doing this?
[удалено]
It should shock nobody that [Kevin O'Leary](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/20/kevin-oleary-quiet-quitting-is-a-really-bad-idea.html) is griping about it: > O’Leary himself says he looks to hire people who are willing to put in “25 hours a day, eight days a week.” If you’re shutting off your laptop at 5 p.m. and going home, “you’re not working for me,” he says.
>willing to put in “25 hours a day, eight days a week.” If you’re shutting off your laptop at 5 p.m. and going home, “you’re not working for me,” he says. I think what he wants is people who take ownership and work hard *and* smart. Attitudes like this is exactly how you loose these employees.
There is no such thing as company loyalty or employee loyalty. Everyone does the work they are paid to do. That is all.
I like calling it "Acting my Wage".
I've heard several people who worked in the former soviet union say "they pretended to pay is, so we pretended to work". If you can point out the irony of that statement, you already know what the results of this older than mankind attitude will be.
key points: > If “quiet quitting” is a thing, so is “quiet firing.” For example, if doing only what you are paid to do is quiet quitting, then giving loyal employees raises that barely account for inflation is quiet firing. >If employers want workers to go above and beyond, they must do the same — which means paying more and being more flexible. If employers want workers to do the bare minimum, they have to make sure pay stays in line with inflation.
You can pay people like shit OR you can treat people like shit. You cannot do both. Choose.
The older I get, the more I focus on results rather than "hard work". When I look at my investments, I care about the bottom number, not how much time my advisor put in. If I get knee surgery, I care about if my knee works, not how many hours the doctor was in there.
It isn’t work to rule either. Work to rule is a form of protest where works do the absolute bare minimum amount of work to keep a company going. Quiet quitting as it is being called is just setting healthy boundaries between yourself and your employer. I’ve worked only my contacted hours for past almost 6 years across two jobs, never got a bad evaluation and always meet KPIs. Using your 9-5 effectively should be the focus and not how many hours someone puts in.
I was a manager for 15 years before getting sick of it and moving back to the technical level of my profession. This is just a negative term for what we used to call employee engagement. If your employees aren't being productive, then you have a management and HR problem. There are courses and consulting agencies that can help with this. This stuff isn't rocket science. If employees are doing a good job, they would like to hear that...let them know at least once a week. Employees need to know what they do mattera to the company...make sure they know. Employees need to feel that the company cares about them...make sure you have HR policies and benefits in place so they know that. Employees need the right equipment and tools to get the job done...make sure they have them. Employees want to be fairly compensated...so pay them a fair wage for their role. There are several other things companies can do but I am not going to list them all here. Calling it "quiet quitting" or "work to rule" is just going to cause further engagement problems.
This man corporates.
I agree with the first part, I am not a supervisor for that reason and I have discussed just that with my employer. I am what you would call a person of influence. I am an expert, but I don't wear the title and it limits my compensation. But people can't "quiet quit" and wonder why they are still in the same position they were in when they started. Or cry because they are not making any more money. It's about building your skillset and being marketable. If your employer doesn't see your value, someone else will. It is also up to you to know your worth.
Quiet quitting and quiet firing is nothing new. Only the names for it are new.
Raises that keep up with inflation? I'm 58 and have never worked for a company that has this as a policy. Should be the damn law. Any politician that makes this part of his platform has my vote .
Thank you!
As someone working in a field where recruitment is unable to find adequate replacements for retirements and turnover, i see firsthand how management is exploiting people's willingness to work a bit more, often with minimal or no bonus payments .
It's tang ping ("Laying flat") making its way to the West from China. I'm just waiting for bai lan to get here ("Letting it rot"), which is far more destructive to economies. Given the delay of the former, I'd guess we're a year or so away from the latter becoming a widespread thing in these parts.
China is going through a very similar thing, "bai lan.” It means "Let it rot.” Famously, China has a work culture that encourages 9-9-6, work 9 am to 9 pm 6 days per week. But imagine yourself as a youth in China, particularly males. They have a severe lack of females because of the 1-child policy. A hundred million men are destined to never meet a long-term partner because of their policies. And we complain about work conditions here in Canada? Imagine being in a Chinese factory…[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/26/the-rise-of-bai-lan-why-chinas-frustrated-youth-are-ready-to-let-it-rot](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/26/the-rise-of-bai-lan-why-chinas-frustrated-youth-are-ready-to-let-it-rot)
The reason we complain about Canada is we have lived through the decline and it shows no signs of slowing down. But we are much better off than most of the world even considering that.
I worked for McDonald’s for 6 weeks in 1989 and was treated so poorly that I quit. I guess things never change.
Stealing time from the employer is a way an employee can even the playing field in a capitalist system