Everyone should be ‘quiet quitting’

There is a reason unions use &quot;work to rule&quot;: it shuts the company down. So when they say<p>&gt; Turn up on time. Do your job. Do it right. Do whatever is asked of you provided it&#x27;s lawful, reasonable. [...] Do not one thing more than that.<p>they are essentially saying do nothing that is not asked of you; that is to say, do nothing that requires agency on your part. That&#x27;s not something that organizationally companies are able to afford.<p>As an individual worker, that strategy probably will work in keeping your job, at least in good times. That&#x27;s not to say it&#x27;d be a fulfilling job--I need some sense of personal agency at work for happiness, but plenty of people don&#x27;t--but it satisfies the goal of maximizing income while minimizing stress.<p>But if that attitude becomes more widespread than it already is, companies will then create or prioritize jobs categories that assume no agency on the part of employees. These jobs are both more depressing, more subject to automation, and lower paying than the ones that expect personal agency.

Not sure I can fully agree; it will just create a downward cycle. The approach doesn’t allow for excellence or gaining satisfaction through doing quality work. However, many jobs are joyless and I think it’s vicious cycle and something has to be done to address these empty of value businesses that are the typical culprits of crappy, overworked jobs.<p>The problem is the seemingly ubiquitous paucity of quality management - there is literally no one appreciating your effort. Many managers, right up to a CX level are so detached from the purpose of the business they manage they can’t determine whether work done good or not.<p>My belief is this general lack of appreciation of excellence and intrinsic disinterest in excellence is the creation of the Friedman&#x2F;Welch school of business - that the purpose of a business is to maximise value to shareholders. I see this as abstract and empty. It removes any value placed on, “we create great products that out customers love,” and replaces it with the dollar reward for shareholders. Make great products everyone wants? Why bother when you can create crap products with misused staff that are cheaply produced that returns more dividends for our shareholders. If you have talent and can produce quality go somewhere where you are appreciated. If you don’t, maybe go with the Homer Simpson approach and sink those companies who equally can’t deliver.

I’m guessing a lot of the people in here bashing this attitude towards work are employed in tech jobs with good salaries, high levels of autonomy, and company stock options.<p>I don’t think this article is geared towards people who have it that good.

We used to call this “doing the least amount you have to do to get by”. And it is what I did in high school - kinda before I learned that having pride in what you do - no matter what that is - is essential to your success and happiness.<p>I wish these folks the best in figuring that out that hard way.

I go hard and let off the gas or “quiet quit” at different times throughout the year. I have work and non work goals that get varying priority. I suspect those that don’t would benefit from a hobby. But also if they are grinding for a work goal who are you to stop them?

Doing the expected well (&#x27;quality work&#x27;) is fairly safe. But, once you start putting out more product&#x2F;effort than is required by the job description,<p>1. That level becomes the new norm - and is expected of you regardless of your pay. (Expect to be treated better? Probably not.) 2. You may set yourself up for resentment from your fellow workers (a lesson I was once taught in hard and multiple ways in an industrial setting.)

&gt; If you still arrive at work early and leave late, without extra pay or time off, you’re a chump.<p>100% agree. upper management does almost zero real work and gets paid 5-50x more than you.<p>relationship with employer is purely business transaction, if not from you, then 110% from them.

Big question is: with GDP still growing at an (averagely) healthy per-capita rate, where does the difference go if whole generation - and in 40 years, real per capita GDP doubled in the U.S. - is worse off than the one before? Is it the inequality that sucked in all difference - that is, that money is all taken by top 1-10%?

&quot;As long as my boss pretends to pay me well i will pretend to work well&quot;

In my experience, this mentality or approach ends up being terrible for a few (i.e. the ones that end up having to do the work) and a net-negative for all. It breeds a culture of deception that feeds on itself and creates widespread insecurity. Not an enjoyable way to spend a big chunk of your life.

If quoting Marx didn&#x27;t convey the ridiculousness of this article, I&#x27;ll state it clearly: this is a sure way to depression and no-one will start a revolution while they&#x27;re busy scrolling Twitter on their leased iPhones.<p>You shouldn&#x27;t do more than you&#x27;re contracted to do, don&#x27;t work overtime, work smart. Within the hours you&#x27;re working and within the amount of stress you can tolerate, give your best, take responsibility and take the best decisions. Sure, if your employer win you&#x27;re not guaranteed a win (hence why you&#x27;re not overworking, and why people with equity tend to overwork more) but there is a higher chance of personal fortune if your employer doesn&#x27;t go broke.

When you have a quiet quitter on your team, it&#x27;s obvious to the rest of the team that they&#x27;re carrying that person, and they resent it.<p>They&#x27;ll claim they&#x27;re doing acceptable work, but only in their own eyes. They invariably have a bad attitude and make work more of a drudgery just by being around. Team morale suffers because of their insufferable selfishness.<p>Everyone has to be a hero in their own narrative, and the quiet quitter is a hero in their own mind by sticking it to the man. What they don&#x27;t see or care about is the rest of the team.

Doing the minimum or being lazy is pretty bad advice. The smart move is to educate yourself on how to organize a union and put together a game plan. This is what corporations are really afraid of and that is because it&#x27;s the one thing that gives you power. Get bent with the Bolshevik revolution crap. The goal isn&#x27;t to end up in a worse place.

You aren&#x27;t hurting the corporation.<p>You&#x27;re hurting the people who will be fired if they don&#x27;t pick up your slack.<p>I left an employer without notice not long ago where the prevailing attitude was more or less to do the minimum you could without being terminated and let the on-calls pick up the slack, after being &quot;accidentally&quot; placed on-call for roughly 7 weeks.<p>It literally destroyed my life in every possible way.<p>I&#x27;m not even open to working in that industry anymore.<p>The buck has to stop somewhere or the checks stop coming.<p>This is essentially open advocation for sociopathy.