The 'Quiet Quitting' Phenomenon
workonomics.substack.com
workonomics.substack.com
I would have my team quit en-mass. I would not help dig my own grave with the promise of enhanced severance. Eff that!
Training your replacements should be considered cruel and undue psychological burden on a fired worker (I mean outsourced staff).
A significant portion of the IT staff at UCSF were long-time immigrants to the US, not that it should matter, but SF is about diversity.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/public-universit...
This is the straw-man various groups use when trying to bring down progressives, but SF is just a city with no political views, the people in it are who hold what views, and I would argue that SF is absolutely not progressive, and the idea that it is is just a continuation of that straw-man to this day.
Anyways, on the topic, that was a shitty thing to do for UCSF and they shouldn't have done it.
There is a reason it is a main tenant in karl marx his writings[0] Ofcourse people are not going to go beyond and above when their job is churned into a mechanisation of actions in which one has little or no control or input.
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation
Quiet quitting = I am paid to do X, so I will do exactly X, not X + Δ needed for a promotion. If you want me to do more then pay me more.
The fact that people choosing to do this is newsworthy shows just how much corporate culture and corporate propaganda has taken over our society in the last few generations.
Its called “quitting” to impose negative thoughts about ppl who just do what they were hired for.
Going beyond and above can cause burnout and boss is the one who gets the promotion either way. Regular worker appreciation is rare.
Even monkeys understand what is fair and what is not.
Who do you think made up that term in the first place?
The one that sits on his wealth as a dragon and hisses on other.
Every job I've ever had is like this. Even if you get a promotion and a raise, the raise will be a fraction of what somebody getting the same title from outside will get. So what's the point? It's easier to switch jobs.
Why is it called quitting at all? That's just... doing your job. Work-to-rule is a form of sabotage where one in fact doesn't adequately perform while maintaining formal obligations, but the idea of "quiet quitting" is as I understand it from this article is to perform your duties in good faith, just not more. I thought it was called work-life balance.
> Data are for compensation (wages and benefits) of production/nonsupervisory workers in the private sector and net productivity of the total economy.
Why pay more when a machine can do the same cheaper ? Its pure capitalism.
For sure some of it. As well as education of the workforce and the changing nature of work.
Either way, the reality is that the benefits have largely gone to capital, rather than labor. And that’s just how the system works, which is why strong unions are important.
Why work more when the pay is the same? Its pure capitalism.
Why work harder when the gains are captured by the owner of the machine? It's not like the owner is working harder, the machine is performing the labor, right?
What is wrong, is when employers try to exploit their workers for more labor without a wage increase to match.
It's perfectly normal for those people to mentally checkout from a non mentally stimulating environment.
At some point you should do the real quitting. Not for another hustle, but for your own mental health.
Because although even the dumbest jobs deserve to be done well, it won't happen without the pride of doing them well. And if you can't get there anymore, it's time for a change.
Sometimes, a change is as good as a holiday. And it can bring a different perspective which will change your beliefs and eventually improve your life.
Sorry for my 5c of morning philosophy but I've been there, multiple times.
The only reasonable explanation is the meme was birthed by TikTok and then self-justified by traditional media repeating it enough. Thus, it is no surprise that it doesn’t reflect reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7SNEdjftno
If people are doing the minimum work required by their employer, it hardly seems like a problem to me. If they decide to miss out on the "rat race" then that's how they choose to participate in their employee relationship. Maybe I'm missing something about this.
"Quiet quitting" seems more like an individual doing the same but without an intention to exert pressure on the employer, but just do the minimum (or do precisely what they're paid to, depending on perspective) and clock off. It's not even the classic, decidedly un-quiet "fuck you, pay me".
Certainly, as said a million times, it's not a new phenomenon. The shaming around it appears to be fairly new.
It also works with "quiet x'ing" like other commenters have said for near infinite tongue-in-cheek jokes and content creation. I don't think it'll go away for awhile. You can shit out an article for almost everything a person/business does that ends in ing.
It's worth making a distinction between "making an effort" to do the minimum, and simply doing the minimum; doing the minimum does not necessarily require additional effort as you have implied.
Possibly one could argue that if additional effort _is_ required, for either achieving the minimum or achieving more than the minimum, the employer pays only for the minimum, so the choice of whether to expend that effort to achieve the minimum or more belongs to the employee.
Sounds like the wsj and their ilk want to have their cake and eat it too. It's a shame that these folks are so out of touch with upcoming generations that their only outlet is churning out more shitstain newspaper articles
if this is the best FUD they have, best of luck to them
This term was allegedly coined in 2009. According to Wikipedia editors, it is demonstrated in the film Office Space (1999) where the main character engages in "quiet quitting" and gets promoted.
[1]: The Church of the SubGenius value, not the Salesforce subsidiary.
It's hardly a new thing
It’s cynical, but it’s honest.
It’s not. Thus, work to rule and nothing more.
The blue collar trades are nothing like they were during the boomers time.
If you don’t live in an area with a union, the only true way to be successful as a tradesman is to work for yourself.
If an employer is unhappy with an employee's performance, they may choose to fire them on that basis, but no matter how much of a clown they think they were, you pay them for the time employed.
If an employer wants employees willing to go the extra mile, then they should offer compensation for those who choose to go the extra mile. This could come in the form of a performance bonus. The people who simply want to do the work they are paid to do and nothing more/less (i.e. the people the media is calling "quiet quitters") will get no additional bonus.
The name "quiet quitting" is disingenuous, as it leads you to think that it means someone is "quitting" when in fact they are just doing what they are paid to do.