‘Quiet quitting’ ... have you heard of it?

I have been retired for many years and imagine the workplace is quite different now. I agree with Urmstongran it does depend a great deal on the job you do. I worked with adults with learning disabilities and couldn't imagine not doing that extra work to support them. I could happily leave the admin though.

Admin takes up a good deal of the time, now.
I had to be seen to arrange activities, design posters to let people head office know, engage on social media--so head office could see in-- type up agendas for meetings and display them, take minutes, and then type them up again...
I also had to type out invites for families, two compulsory cooking sessions a week, two art sessions, arrange and sort out spiritual wellness and church to come in and visit, all on minimum wage. 75 residents.

Ha I didn’t know there was a name for it. I’ve been disinterested in my job for the last few years, even more so now I have less than a year to go until retirement.

I’d never heard of it either, until it was mentioned on TV this morning, when it was referred as ‘acting your wage’.

I've worked with a few people who only did the absolute minimum but no more - I found them to be rather uncooperative and unhelpful but not bad enough to sack do you know what I mean? A shortage of staff (or relatives higher up in the company) meant they were able to cling on anyway.

Whereas conscientious types (willing workhorses) who were always on time, rarely off sick, and went the extra mile were rewarded with - yet more work. The lazy man was never asked. I think Alexander Solzenhitsyn wrote something along those lines and it's as true now as it was when it was first written. Pardon my cynicism.

I would not equate "quiet quitting" with not doing your share. Rather with not doing more than your share. In every workplace there are those who get through the jobs quickly and efficiently and those who spend a lot of time by the water cooler chatting. Yet both groups may, on paper, be present for the hours they were paid.

I was one of the former, and usually got through my work much quicker than colleagues. Once I decided to apply for university and "quietly quit" I dropped to the lower speed and made sure that I kept pace with, but did not exceed, the work rate of my colleagues.

If course it was noticed!

One day my boss took me on one side and remarked that of late I had seemed "less productive" than hitherto. I asked for an example. He told me "Well this year you took 10 days to do X but last year you took only 7."

My response was that the timeframe in which I had completed the work was on a par with that of people in a similar position to myself. So why had he singled out my performants? If he preferred we could contiue the conversation formally with my union rep present!

The conversation ended abruptly. My boss knew when he was snookered. A few weeks later I handed in my resignation with the explanation that I was "returning to higher education to improve my qualifications."

I often wonder what he made of that.

.

My grandmother used to say (of housework because she never had an employed job) that "the more you do, the more you can do" and "It will still be there when you are gone."

She was a very wise woman and lived to be 96.

Work to rule under another name.

Their is nothing new in this. I have worked with many people who do just enough. Sometimes senior staff have relied on their juniors to do all the work while they take the plaudits.

Quiet Quitting isnt 'Coasting'
During lock down when we were working from home - I still am.
Employers figured that - well you are there you can just do it. Some employers expected you to be continually plugged into work. There was no work/life balance for some at all. Some people were living and working in the same room. I consider myself lucky because I have an office at home that I can just shut the door on at the end of the day.
My company made a suggestion of no meetings over the lunch time period, but not many adhered to that. You were there, therefore you could work. Not many people got any recognition of thanks for working long and tiring hours with the expectation that the more you do the more they wanted.
So people said, hold on a minute, this is not sustainable - so they quietly quit all the additinal work that was forced upon them.
Its nothing to do with being lazy or having no ambition but more to do with trying to burn yourself out.

It's not quitting (wtongly phrased I feel), nor is it not putting in effort. It is doing what you are paid to do and not doing additional unpaid work. I don't expect to go into the supermarket, pay for my groceries and expecting more than I have paid for.
I've been down the route of putting work before family for the majority of my working life for the same employer and my own health, suffered for it and no acknowledgement for it.
I took early retirement because although I was working part time in my last couple of years there, with the accordingly reduced wage, I was still expected to continue with a full time workload, be available full time, put aside caring for my vulnerable mother in favour of attending meetings on days I wasn't contracted to work (oh really?!) and was condemned for not taking the work mobile phone home to be instantly available, or indeed for answering it while I was driving (illegal!). In my last year at work my new (and dictatorial) manager was setting me up to be sacked, hence my taking early retirement. She clearly couldn't deal with losing control over me, and sent me a summons to attend for a grievance she had against me, well after I had left! What a waste of taxpayers' money.
Apparently she is no longer in that post....

I am so in agreement with poppyred, nice to know that someone felt the same

I worked in education and when my dad died I didn’t know we were allowed some compassionate leave. My boss “forgot” to tell me. Fortunately one of the very lowly paid admin staff put me in the picture and I took the time. It was noticeable the same boss took 2 weeks off when HIS dad passed away.

Really, I think most of us feel that attitudes to work have changed greatly during our working lives.

Towards the end of mine, I felt I was being "put upon" to a certain extent. We no longer taught from textbooks that were up-to -date, so we all, if we really wanted to teach our subjects , we spent time finding materials we could use that would interest our classes and fulfill syllabus and exam requirements.

Teaching from being just that - a matter of teaching children and to a certain extend enriching them and doing our part in bringing them up, changed in the late 1980's towards being also a matter of form-filling. Endless evaluations of pupils, endless meetings with colleagues and parents.

In 2013 when I retired, I had been spending four hours a day of my own time either correcting essays and exercises or trying to find suitable teaching material.

You can only do so for a limited time, if it is not to cost you either your health, your sanity, or your marriage.

I opted for retirement to retain heath, sanity and husband.

I feel sincerely sorry for those who do not enjoy their work and find it easy to understand why they try to get by doing the basic minimum.

It is one thing to be ambitious - but something completely different never seeing the children you brought into the world except when they are asleep, or never having time to see friends, family, spring clean or do anything except work, work, work.

E-mails and mobiles - blessings or curses? For a while parents would say reprovingly, "I tried phoning/mailing and got no reply". "Indeed, you did, after school hours in my free time. That is why you got no reply".

Life is meant to be lived to the full. Not just to be a matter of work. Basically we work to earn our living. If we are fortunate we both make a comfortable living and enjoy our work.

If we are unfortunate, we earn next to nothing and end up with stress, ulcers or worse.

Should this be the way life is? I don't think so.

I have and I've also done it many times in the past too!! It used to be called "work to rule" whereby employees do what they're contracted to do and no more but no less! I use it as a weapon against real nasty employers trying to stuff me to kingdom come! They can't sack you for it and it does focus their attention on your t&C's somewhat when they realise that I DONT WORK FOR NOTHING, THATS SLAVERY!! Good for them I'd say, about time greedy mean employers woke up!

My SIL gives his all to his job, no matter what it is, and goes far beyond the call of duty. It always seems to me that inevitably his employers start to take the proverbial and he ends up feeling put upon whilst his wife plus children wait at home for him as he works longer hours than he is ever paid. He then ends up with an unhappy life all around.

My son has worked hard to be recognised for promotion or at least be in with a chance. His boss, who has encouraged him, has just moved up and he hoped to be able to apply for the job as it will probably be the last chance for a considerable while to get promotion. The next thing he knows, they are going to advertise for new people outside the organisation and won't be looking at current employees. To say he is now quite disheartened and thinking of working to rule, is an understatement.

Oopsadaisy1

I also think that as people are contactable 24/7 a lot of Companies expect you to answer queries via email or text all hours of the day, night, weekends and holidays. Why should you?
Work life balance has to start somewhere. I don’t see it as ‘coasting’ it’s just working the hours that you are paid for and overtime if you work extra hours.
Of course there are Management jobs that require you to work as and whenever you are needed, but the wages usually compensate you for that.
But I still think that unless it’s very urgent emails and texts from the office should wait until the next working day.

In my last job before retirement, our workload increased to a point where there was no time in the working day to check email. One day I told my supervisor I hadn't had chance to check email for 3 days! Her response - " but there may be things that are important." My response - "Tough!"
I was hourly paid, expected sometimes to stay beyond my contracted hours without getting paid or given time off in lieu. I could have refused but did it for the sake of the students I supported, for their benefit, not my bosses. However I drew the line at checking email in my own time! If it was so important come and say it to me, otherwise accept that the email message may not reach me!

Had I not been about to retire I'm not sure I could have continued to be radical about it. I felt sorry for my colleagues who didn't have the option to leave with a pension. At least 2 left via 'long term sickness due to stress'! At one point I considered leaving and working for an agency for the last year. Thank goodness I didn't as the pandemic came and I'd have had no work! As it was, the months of 'working from home' made up for all the unpaid overtime.

When I actually retired I wrote to the school governors on behalf of my former colleagues to let them know the situation. Some things changed as a result, but I'm sure not everything, and as school funding gets more limited the situation with probably deteriorate again.

Sometimes working to rule is the only way to retain your sanity and any semblance of work-life balance!

Quiet quitting has been around for generations but maybe not written about in The Times where I saw the article. Perhaps it says a lot about employers as well as the staff and probably a great deal about lockdown and what the fall out of that has been for employees.

lovebeigecardigans1955

I've worked with a few people who only did the absolute minimum but no more - I found them to be rather uncooperative and unhelpful but not bad enough to sack do you know what I mean? A shortage of staff (or relatives higher up in the company) meant they were able to cling on anyway.

Whereas conscientious types (willing workhorses) who were always on time, rarely off sick, and went the extra mile were rewarded with - yet more work. The lazy man was never asked. I think Alexander Solzenhitsyn wrote something along those lines and it's as true now as it was when it was first written. Pardon my cynicism.

This is my experience but a new manager came on the scene, I suspect to clear out the 'dead wood', one by one over a year the older team members were culled (it was that vicious) then came my turn I loved my job up until the bullying started and I was not going to be bullied it ended with me receiving a written apology and them leaving me to do my job and not have to undertake all the other stuff I did before (coaching, arranging conferences and training courses, writing materials for training manuals etc) all those roles went to juniors who just could not spell or string a sentance together so I coasted for about 4 years until the company folded and over 500 were made redundant such a waste of a good company who decided to employ bullies for managers. Mind you, it was the first time in over 40 years of employment that I coasted and I found it was enjoyable, wish I knew that years ago.

I've lost count of the employers who say in interview "we're a a very give and take kinda company" meaning: YOU give and WE take! It was never ever the true meaning or other way round! Those who think being diligent in doing contracted Hours and duties- is not being a go- getter or not a ' team player' are usually - managers who have been promoted way above their capabilities!! I used to say to my staff, if you constantly feel you need to work through breaks/ late then you're either not organised or we need more staff! I never ever tried to bully anyone into " giving a bit more" unless voluntarily and with appropriate pay!

For personal satisfaction I have always done the best that I can for my contracted hours, and ensured that I was up to speed with any job that I have had.
However, I would never do as much as five minutes free overtime, having seen two older close relatives who put everything into their work, to the detriment of family life, and gained nothing. Both were overlooked, and their extra efforts and hours of unpaid overtime were simply taken for granted, but when other members of staff did some extra time they were praised. A lesson learned for me.

There's also a trend Mishy which has been with us for a while to employ the absolute minimum number of staff so that there is no slack, if more than two people are off sick at any one time the ones who remain are pushed beyond the limit - and then they get the blame when things go wrong, not to mention an unhealthy atmosphere where people are almost afraid of taking time off in case they are accused of not being good team members.

Isn't retirement wonderful?

I spent almost all my life working for local and health authorities and worked very hard. Then the section I worked for got privatised and I decided I would no longer "go the extra mile". I suspect a lot of people who work for big businesses feel the same. It feels very different working for someone else's profit than for the good of other people.

One boss said after 18months "it's time to put a bit more in" aka work Saturday up to 3pm unpaid! Really?! I said "thanks but no thanks my weekends are sacrosanct!"
him:"that's not what you said at interview?"
Me" you promised me £15k/ pa plus Bupa too at interview, seems we both were frugal with the truth eh?"
Him: " it will be noted"
Me: " you bet it will!" 3 months later left job for double my £11999/pa proxy job.
I saw him in a bank last month , looks much same, retired and 22years older , he stared at me staring at him , didn't know me so I said" it's rude to stare old man" he was beside himself nwith embarrassment
Me" you can get arrested for that you know!"
Him? Walked out red and shaking, great, love that he felt as threatened as I did all those years ago as a single mum........