Quiet Quitting Is a Fake Trend | Hacker News Reader

Quiet Quitting Is a Fake Trend

theatlantic.com

71 pointsfortran7735 comments

I guess that described me. Call it whatever you want, but for me the feeling was disinterest.

When I joined the company I was so pumped, worked all day, was basically free on call 24/7. For what? A yearly 'good job last year', while watching people I actively despised for never being online or really doing much keep weaseling their way up the ranks.

It doesn't take long to realize, at the end of the day, the only difference between me and Joe 6 pack who did the bare minimum was a yearly pat on the back. So yeah, be more like Joe, unless your company and manager are truly awesome and aware. Most are not.

There's a pretty good movie which lampoons the modern office and explains why people "quiet quit". It's called Office Space, and it was released in 1999.

>It's not just about me and my dream of doing nothing. It's about all of us. I don't know what happened to me at that hypnotherapist and, I don't know, maybe it was just shock and it's wearing off now, but when I saw that fat man keel over and die - Michael, we don't have a lot of time on this earth! We weren't meant to spend it this way. Human beings were not meant to sit in little cubicles staring at computer screens all day, filling out useless forms and listening to eight different bosses drone on about about mission statements.

if companies pay the minimum salary, or "market average" (cost to replace you)

isn't it only rational to then give the minimum effort (to not be replaced)?

further, the best way to get a large pay rise is by finding a new job rather than "working hard" and being promoted.

I know it as: They pretend to pay, so we pretend to work.

Just call it normal effort instead of minimum.

With minimal effort expect a minimal career. Don't complain when late in life you have minimal success.

> "...so a single person is replaceable and it's not even noise."

of course, someone who hold this kind of opinion would say that

Yes, it's easy to get an outcome you like by removing context.

But go ahead and do minimal work at all your jobs, then report how well that worked for you.

Then we can empirically see which world view is more accurate.

Of course, crypto boys don't have the best track records of reading reality, do they?

Yes. Its either finding another job or investing in your skills or contacts or side projects in order to find another job.

Invest in yourself. Dont invest in a company.

I think there's a big difference between market average and replacement cost.

The average market value is (in theory) the average person in your field, putting in the average amount of effort. If you're putting in the minimum amount of effort, it's safe to assume that the amount of work you're doing can be replaced by somebody that's less talented than average. As such, you can be replaced for a lower annual salary.

Point being is that your replacement value is directly related to job performance. If you're not doing an average amount of work, you are not worth the market rate.

My understanding of this whole "Quite Quitting" saga is that it's just burnout coupled with anxiety - that has effected the masses.

Before the 2020 shit storm, some had burnout, while some others had anxiety. The effected percentage was in the single digits. But now over 75% are affected by a combination of both.

I think that we have to accept that the world has changed. The way we function has changed.

Think about the days before internet and mobile.

If I just moved away from a friend that I went to a public place with lots of people, I had to find a pay phone and leave a message at my friend's answering machine at home, telling where to meet and go to the meeting spot and wait hoping that my friend has to call his home and listened to his saved message.

Just imagine that one fine day, the whole earths population get a mobile phone and is connected to the internet in just 24 hrs - the whole population of earth.

Think of all the radical changes we need to make to our lives. Tear down all payphones, shut down the answering machine making companies. This is just a very narrow example. Think how it will scale.

Everyone is struggling to make sense of this new world and their place in it - every human being. Those humans include the employees, managers and owners. All are struggling, and all are trying to make sense of the mess and how to move on.

So instead of blaming each other and shifting the blame, work together.

This is my take of "quite quitting". People are just preoccupied dealing with burnout & anxiety. Not focusing 100% at work.

I would like to know anyone else agrees with me and would really love to hear from the ones that don't agree with me.

("quiet", though in your defense I proceeded to make the same typo myself just now)

I don't know if this is as big a change as you think it is. There is no huge world-changing technology that just got released. We already had phones and the internet.

I'm experiencing burnout too, but when I look around, I have trouble seeing what actually changed in my life. I do effectively the same job I did before, in much the same way; my coworkers now exist in a rectangle on my screen labeled "Zoom" but otherwise behave as before. I have trouble believing that's enough to cause a mass epidemic of burnout.

I have considered the possibility that I happened to burn out for unrelated reasons at the same time all the extroverts of the world burned out because Zoom is actually that much worse for them, but I have no idea how to test or measure that.

Thoughtful people have always been students of reciprocation. If you are being fairly treated, fairly compensated for doing a job and treated well by your employer then you should do your job well and return the treatment they have shown you. If you are being poorly treated and underpaid for a job then you are completely justified in half-assing it and showing the same disregard for your employer that they show to you.

This is not a new trend or a new idea.

I think you’re understating what “quiet quitting” is. It’s doing your job according to your express obligations, regardless of how you’re being treated. It’s not half assing it. It’s just… also not double assing it. It isn’t new, but it’s a perspective I think I’ve seen misrepresented enough times that it deserves clarification.

I’m not sure this is accurate either… doesn’t “quiet quitting” simply indicate doing as little work as possible to avoid being fired?

No, you're thinking of “value engineering”

I see 'quiet quitting' as 'working to rule'. I follow my company's rules to the letter; no more, no less.

I think it's kinda new: before covid people did above and beyond in hopes of a promotion or something. Covid gave them time to think, and changed their behavior accordingly.

Can we stop acknowledging this propaganda term for not being exploited by false promises?

Im quite active in my work. Taking ownership thinking about how to solve issues, lean and clean, good documentation etc and if I would only do minimum work, I would neither learned that much nor would I have the experience which allows me my carrier I have.

And yes I'm still only working full time but my salary is now nearly half as much as a lot of 'normal' people who did not spend the time like I did.

And I will continue to work like this.

Of course I'm not 100% sure if or how much of my own IQ has a part in this or that it(all of it) is my hobby as well but still.

And if certain things are not valued money wise Ina prev company, I still had enough to show to the new company.

If you like your work and you are good at it, it's more fun, you gain more privilege and when you optimize yourself away you have either tons of R&D time or can take the next challenge.

But your manager will seldom Loos a person like this.

For sale of argument, let's say you were paid half what you currently are, same company/manager/etc.; would you still put in as much effort?

One unfortunate reality is that programmers or other programmer-adjacent jobs tend to be paid quite well, and as such the "work equal to pay" mindset is a bit strange compared to normal office jobs. I've personally known someone at my job, which paid me let's say $X, and paid them $⅓X for us both working on the same project. Surprise surprise, that person put in minimum effort necessary to get the job done, and has since left the company for another that is paying them closer to $½X.

Yes.

I started with a very low salary and basically climbing the ladder slow and steady.

With my attitude and I do believe I'm climbing that ladder because of it.

You need to be ready when opportunities arrive.

Not only is it a fake trend, it's capitalist propaganda meant to make people feel bad for doing the job they're being paid to do.

You want people to do more work? Pay them more money and give them the responsibility.

"The Wallstreet Journal" and Bloomberg taking interest in young peoples' affairs in an effort to control their behavior is the reason why GenZ increasingly loathes boomers. Where's the freedom? Feels like they took it all

Bit of an odd complaint on a site for people whose companies pay them in stock.

I have empathy for my fellow workers. I also value my stock options at 0 until a liquidation event. The industry is rife with stories of people working their asses off for years and getting nothing out of their options.

right.. completely fake trend. If you want to call people doing a minimum amount of work at a job where no one that they work for: (1) actually knows what they're doing (2) cares about what they're doing (3) pays any attention to where they are (home, out walking the dog, etc)

then yeah, give it a click-bait sounding name and write a bunch of articles about it. I call it the same thing it always was : people working for a companies that make enough money in other areas so they don't have to care about what every single employee does. This has happened since the advent of large companies, working from home simply exacerbated this trend because you don't have to feel like you're working, just because you traveled to your workplace..even though you end up doing the exactly the same nothing.

Of course it is. The media has a very impressive track record of making mountains out of some obscure social trend that nobody can quite pin down.

I remember the pearl clutching around heavy metal, the occult, etc.

They sell clicks. Whether a story is true is of secondary importance.

Before the term was coined I was a quiet quitter myself for a long time in my career. And guess what, I was doing fine and employers were quite okay with my work and my reliability. Id often see hungry juniors going out of their way to overdeliver before running into the same walls I did long long time ago. I tend to agree that this is fake propaganda meant to make people guilty for not giving the elusive ‘more’ to their employers. And it is sickening to know some people craft this type of propaganda solely for their own gain.

Finally someone with common sense wrote something about this.

I have no idea how this thing even caught on.

there truly is strength in great slogans/words. Like the Great Resignation before, Quiet Quitting has a certain ring to it that just encaptures the mind. Both concepts are a little nonsensical, but have enough truth in it to garner readers.

Or said otherwise: they are simply great clickbait word creations.

Great Resignation drove me crazy. You can't look at job quits without looking at job hires! It was actually the Great People Realizing They Have Better Options and Finding New Jobs, combined with the Medium People Realizing They'd Rather Retire Early.

Quiet Quitting aka Working

Orwell rightly warned us of newspeak language perversion.

Most trends are fake until the media boosts 'em these days.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com