Weekend Reading – Quiet Quitting Edition

So much to unpack here.

For the most part, “Quiet Quitting” is “work to rule”, or doing only what the job description says. Nothing more, nothing less. I cringe when it’s suggested Quiet Quitting is an act of laziness or poor employee attitude (of their own accord). Over the course of my 30+ year career, about half of which has been in a managerial role, I acknowledge I have supervised some employees who “checked out” – doing less than their job description. They didn’t need Tiktok. Employees taking advantage of employers is no older than employers taking advantage of employees.

I believe it boils down to workplace culture – employee engagement. I have been an enthusiastic member of employee engagement committees throughout my career both as staff and as management’s and when it’s done right there is alignment and productivity is trending high. When it’s done poorly, morale suffers, interest in doing the best job possible wanes, and employees gripe.

In terms of employee engagement, the work from home approach presented serious challenges to a well run employee engagement program. My current employer’s efforts have suffered with respect to employee engagement, but with the commencement of activity returning to the office they are definitely reinvigorated to improve in this area. I think they would also acknowledge they were unprepared (understandably) on how to promote engagement in a work from home environment. They are also taking steps to improve engagement for the remote teams.

Quiet Quitting, or as I prefer to call it poor employee engagement, is in many cases a reflection of management. If I was managing employees that I suspected of quiet quitting the first place I’d have to look is in the mirror. What actions am I taking, or not taking, to contribute to the lack of engagement, and what opportunities are there for me to make a difference?

I don’t thing Quiet Quitting is all that new, but I do think COVID introduced remote work capabilities and employee engagement suffered greatly as a result. Hopefully employers like mine will prevail and look for ways to motivate, inspire and engage their staff as the trend back to more traditional work environments continues but also find ways to better engage employees who are able to continue in a work from home role (which is certainly my preference).

This article on a U.S. study was a great read on the topic.

https://hbr.org/2022/08/quiet-quitting-is-about-bad-bosses-not-bad-employees

It’s one perspective; one study but I think there is merit to the findings.

This is nothing new and it’s clearly an in-group vs. out-group situation. Employers vs. employees. Employers want the most work completed for the least amount of dollars. That maximizes profits, and it’s nothing new. The biggest game changer is/was the pandemic. It showed everyone in the workforce (who could work from home – not everyone could) what work could be like. That there was actually a way to achieve a better work/life balance. Namely, that means hybrid or remote work.

However, the younger generations would naturally embrace technology more and desire a remote work situation. I know I’m touching on another issue here but I think this is one reason why more employees feel empowered to search for better. Whether it means less burnout, or more days working from home.

The employers have set up a system where they can incentivize people to work long hours in return for the offer or possibility of a promotion (aka more dollars at some point in the future). That competition is enough to keep those who want to achieve more working on weekends. Sure it might be a choice for them, but there are lower-paid employees trying to impress or just trying to hang on to their jobs that face the same weeknight/weekday demands because of the “culture”.

I think Ian (above) said it best. Most employees are complicit with being taken for a ride by their employers because they have a debt-backed lifestyle, so they have to “stay the course” and work in conditions that are sub-optimal. Which could lead to the feelings that make you want to “quiet quit”. I don’t know if this is a “fad” or if it’s an actual shift in the mindset of more employees.

The other thing we should be all aware of is that the youngest generations are being squeezed more than any generation before. Global competition for jobs here and abroad, the higher cost of living, and the difficulty to find a job in their field (this one I’m using anecdotal evidence – so this is far from being something that can be generalized). If you’re working in a field that you don’t have an interest in, then naturally most will “mail it in”, because they are bored.

Would the rise of Unions be the “not so quiet quitting” of your great grandparents generation. They were the same age as the millennials now being attacked for being lazy over taking action against profiteering and capitalism at the expense of the workforce.

I welcome it and it is a collective yet individual action to bring attention to companies that they can’t continue to push people beyond what is acceptable. If you want a person who works 24/7/365 then make that extremely clear and have a pay that reflects it. Don’t expect to keep getting away with asking (even demanding) more from employees of their time outside of scope and getting away with it. There needs to be a fair transaction of pay vs time and thankfully the discussion is on the table.

More power to them ( ** I was a regional manager in my career in a demanding industry and now own a small business that employs several currently)

I don’t like the term quiet quitting, a lot of people are just doing their job, and it’s not just younger people. I’m 50ish and over the course of my adult life I’ve seen more and more examples of companies taking liberties with their employees. It’s a contract – we do a job that a company needs doing, they pay us money for doing it. It is not acceptable for companies to treat people like they own their lives. The expectation to go above and beyond all the time is a scam so that corporations get work done for free. And they achieved this by creating the corporate culture nonsense to make employees feel like they were a part of a wider family, so they would feel more inclined to give up their evenings and weekends. But loyalty to a company often comes with a slap in the face come redundancy time. And discussing your concerns with your manager is likely to put you at the front of the line for job cuts. I’ve worked for many companies over the years and very few actually go above and beyond for their employees, so why should we do that for them?
As for people doing as little as possible, that’s just called “slacking off”. It’s nothing new. Just as some companies want people to do extra work for nothing, some people will always try and get money for doing nothing.

Quiet quitting is an unfortunate name for this but is fair. I am in my 50s and enjoy my work but there are limits. Many employers expect employees to do many tasks for free, go above and beyond. This movement, I think, is about setting boundaries and doing just your job. If an employer wants more then find ways to compensate it. Why should an employee make a sacrifice to ensure their employer comes out ahead. It should be a partnership.