Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, "quiet quitting" isn't doing the bare minimum not to get fired; it's DOING THE JOB YOU WERE HIRED TO DO but no more.
Semantics.
Quote:
The term "quiet quitting" has different shades of meaning depending on the source. While individual contributors might think in terms of otherwise "engaged workers setting reasonable boundaries", their employers might see them instead as "slackers who are willfully underperforming".
Another perspective differentiates "quiet quitting" from "work-to-rule", positing that the primary objective of quiet quitting is not to disrupt the workplace, but rather to avoid occupational burnout and to pay more attention to one's mental health and personal well-being.
This can be a benefit to workers (less engaged. less strife, less emotional investment)
For bosses; less disturbance in the workforce, agitation, shxt disturber
Exactly. Employers/bosses should be happy and grateful that employees do well on their job duties in the job description. If everybody in the workplace did this, the employers/bosses should not have many problems.
The problems with employers/bosses and employees are:
Employers/bosses:
. They don't want to make the job description clearly, specifically and stick it, and let employees to stick with it also. They always want to add fine lines to trick employees, and they can add more duties later as they want. And they even expect employees to go above and beyond. When the workloads are up above your head, you could hardly to finish the loads in eight hours. You often have to stay overtime, and don't get OT pay, not even regular pay (talking about wage here, not salary), how can you be happy and go above and beyond? They are lucky if you don't become sick yet.
. They let some stupid managers to do whatever they (the managers) want, even to bully employees and play favouritism. And those stupid managers create bullying, jealousy, hate and chaos in the workplace. That's very bad culture/environment. In such environment, nobody wants to be good and do good job anymore.
Employees:
. Lots of employees are very tricky, cheating and lazy. Not all are good and hard-working.
. Many employees are _ss kissers and get favours from some managers.
. Hard-working employees have to do lots more work by taking slacks and job duties from the managers' favourite employees and the "sick" ones as the managers force them to do. And these hard-working employees become burnt out, resentful and sick also. Who would want to be good and working hard when the harder you work, the more work you have to do without more pay or bonuses?
There are always many kinds of people and two sides for everything.
This may not be a popular opinion, but what is so wrong with only doing the job you were hired to do? If one is following all the rules, being a harmonious co-worker, etc. it is not a bad thing. I say this because I always gave more than 100% and it never paid off because of the bolded items below, and is exactly why I recently quit my little part-time requirement job. I paid my dues for 30+ years. I have no desire to continue dealing with b.s. I do think in the right setting it is appropriate and even necessary to go above and beyond.
Quote:
Employers/bosses:
. They don't want to make the job description clearly, specifically and stick it, and let employees to stick with it also. They always want to add fine lines to trick employees, and they can add more duties later as they want. And they even expect employees to go above and beyond. When the workloads are up above your head, you could hardly to finish the loads in eight hours. You often have to stay overtime, and don't get OT pay, not even regular pay (talking about wage here, not salary), how can you be happy and go above and beyond? They are lucky if you don't become sick yet.
. They let some stupid managers to do whatever they (the managers) want, even to bully employees and play favouritism. And those stupid managers create bullying, jealousy, hate and chaos in the workplace. That's very bad culture/environment. In such environment, nobody wants to be good and do good job anymore.
Employees:
. Lots of employees are very tricky, cheating and lazy. Not all are good and hard-working.
. Many employees are _ss kissers and get favours from some managers.
. Hard-working employees have to do lots more work by taking slacks and job duties from the managers' favourite employees and the "sick" ones as the managers force them to do. And these hard-working employees become burnt out, resentful and sick also. Who would want to be good and working hard when the harder you work, the more work you have to do without more pay or bonuses?
Companies should be less concerned with the mere existence of quiet quitting and more concerned with the REASONS for quiet quitting.
Is it because the company doesn't recognize or reward ambition, effort, and innovation? Have workers constantly been shot down when they've had good ideas, or been denied promotions because they're "too valuable in their current roles?"
I'm much less concerned with a burned out short-timer than I would be with someone who did great work, didn't feel appreciated, and was discouraged into doing the bare minimum, or even worse is doing the bare minimum while seeking other options.
Companies should be less concerned with the mere existence of quiet quitting and more concerned with the REASONS for quiet quitting.
Is it because the company doesn't recognize or reward ambition, effort, and innovation? Have workers constantly been shot down when they've had good ideas, or been denied promotions because they're "too valuable in their current roles?"
I'm much less concerned with a burned out short-timer than I would be with someone who did great work, didn't feel appreciated, and was discouraged into doing the bare minimum, or even worse is doing the bare minimum while seeking other options.
I agree that they need to pay attention but they don't. Most companies don't. And they don't intend to.
As for "burned out short-timer" I'm 70 and long retired. I was simply looking for a decent part time job to supplement my income in this inflationary period. Those jobs are out there, but grocery isn't the best place to find them. I was astounded, shocked and dismayed by the ridiculous policies of corporate management (their ludicrous dog and pony during "orientation" and their almost complete lack of formal training). Not only that, the disgusting lack of work ethic, morals, general ethics and grooming standards by a large percentage of co-workers. I think that those co-workers would shape up if management insisted not only on better behavior and grooming, but provided better policies that improve morale and motivation.
Still, I did my very best on that job because first of all I have a strong work ethic, and I take pride and satisfaction in doing a good job. It was NOT rewarded. Quite the opposite, in fact, while unsavory employees got a complete pass.
Since then, I'm working independently. People don't want to be tied down working for a company when many of them can do an independent gig in this gig economy and set their own hours and policies.
Whether I was working my very first job at age 18 through all the jobs I've ever had to now, I never had the mentality of, "I'll just do the very bare minimum"...& there were a couple of times that I knew I didn't have much longer to work the job.
Actually, there might have just been 1x that I minorly did it, now that I think of it, but I think ANYONE would have done the same thing when I explain my situation:
I knew my job was going to be over in June of a certain year. I had to report to jury duty sometime in April, was picked as a juror, & ended up being on a 2-month long case. When it was over, I literally had like 1 week left of work before it was all over anyway, so OK in those last 5 days (M-F), I did the minimum because in the line of work I had at the time, there's nothing to really do that last week anyway & everyone at the co. knew that for themselvesv/everyone too. SO I wouldn't even consider that, "quiet quitting".
I don't even know what all this had to do w/ COVID anyway.
I'm sorry but doing your job, even if only the bare minimum should not be considered quiet quitting. I can see where people will be annoying with folks who only do the bare minimum but that's a far cry from quitting.
Agree. Doing your job is called..."doing your job."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
