Have you ever done “quiet quitting” even if you didn’t call it that?

When you say ‘incomers’, biglouis, what do you mean? In your earlier post you said that you were fully qualified in a professional role, but then that you left to go to university because others were coming in with worthless qualifications.

I’m struggling to understand the situation. I can understand resentment if you were more qualified than the ‘incomers’, but it sounds as though you left to become as qualified as they were.

You’d lose your job here. They are quite ruthless that way, unless you were an MP, of course.

Karl Marx had some very powerful things to say about alienation in the workplace. This was particularly true in systems of mass production or where workers did not feel that their contribution was valued or adequately rewarded.

In the situation which I described (where in-comers were being preferred over more experienced workers) I believe I was fully justified in easing down to the equivalent speed and productivity exhibited by my colleagues. It was certainly noticed. But by that point I was only a few weeks from handing in my resignation.

Give and take is what it takes to have a good atmosphere at work.

Absolutely agree with that.

As for working hours that are 'unseen' - we logged all our hours to the project we were working on, with overtime hours logged separately. The company operated a 'time in lieu' policy so we got at least some of the hours back at a time it was convenient for the project.

Marydoll

Baggs

Sago

I cannot imagine any profession whereby time off would be granted for an interview.

Perhaps not, but one could use days out of one's annual leave.

Teachers were given time off for interviews in my school, I'm sure it was the same LA wide.
Otherwise we couldn't attend them!

Yes, Teachers were given time off for interviews as were Dr's.
When I was pregnant my anti-natal clinic appointments were at some ungodly hour in the morning then I went off to work. Later the young ones had them, doctor's appointments and Dentist during school time. We had such long holidays the dental regular checkups could be booked then.
Oddly the ones who never stopped late or did anything out of school time ended up with promotions and even Advisor's jobs. They could talk the talk but never worked the worked.
Then came The National Curriculum and Ofsted and a lot of worried people.
I never had to socialise with my job but I did with DH ,I never minded at home when I knew who was coming but at big dinners and social gatherings, I had to watch what I said sitting next to profs and even Lords.

I’ve never done that, and never would.
We are reasonable and flexible with all our staff, and for the most part they do their part, sometimes beyond what is expected of them.
But we did employ someone once, who was taking a phone call, at precisely 1.00 he put the call on hold and asked someone else to take over because he was on lunch.
He didn’t make it passed his probationary period.
Give and take is what it takes to have a good atmosphere at work.

I didn’t ease up at any stage in my career.
Neither did the majority of colleagues. Doodle is right, there are a few in teaching/social work/health who are known to take extended sick leave with stress or a bad back. There is no excuse for managers not following sickness absence procedures but often they don’t, leaving others to pick up the pieces.

I don’t know any young people who refuse to work overtime and all those other things biglouis - the work ethic is alive and well

I think it boils down to wether you are a “ team player “ or an empire builder.

"Quiet quitting" is an inaccurate way to say you do your duties in the time you are hired for, for the amount you are paid
Aka life work balance - what is wrong with that?

I admire this new trend to stand up as individuals, especially when loyalty from employer does not exist.
Layoffs come at any time and doesn't matter what you have done to go above and beyond

Not all contracts have 'paid hours' though. Mine was to 'work flexibly around a 37 hour week', which could mean anything, and there was also a clause that meant that I could be expected to carry out 'other duties at the discretion of the university'.

As someone still working on NHS.. Not a hope. I'm lucky to get a lunch break.

Germanshepherdsmum

Indeed it doesn’t Doodledog. I wonder how some posters here would have felt if their solicitor worked strict hours, let things get behind and nobody covered for them when they were away. If I and my colleagues worked like that we would have had no clients - but possibly a clutch of negligence claims.

My conveyancing solicitor did indeed work strict hours and let things get very very behind indeed to the point where I almost lost the sale.

I do not expect anyone, whatever their profession, to work outside their paid hours. A contract is signed by both employer and employee and it should be abided by.

This idea that if you are not doing lots of unpaid overtime then you are not doing a good job is fundamentally wrong.

I've always worked to my own (too) high standards, so couldn't just drift along doing a barely ok job. I did an awful lot of unpaid extra work at home - lesson planning, marking and organising many things that fell outside my remit - just to get things done for my own peace of mind. I put my heart and soul into projects.

I did notice, though, quite a few, usually younger colleagues who did the minimum to get by, didn't care a hoot and arrived/left exactly on time. Of course, it was always those useless ones that were made redundant with a generous payment, so unfair.

I was in the very fortunate position of being in a profession which was both mentally and sometimes physically demanding - and I loved every minute. Had the rules allowed me to continue beyond the age of 65, I'd still be beavering away at it..

Before teaching I worked for the NHS. Towards the end we had a director who expected us to come to things like a Sunday bbq. The whole department was shocked when i said no, that’s family time.
At that time we didn’t have a mobile phone or computer so i was reachable when i was at work.
I worked hard when I was there and never dreamed of taking work home with me.

Then I trained to be a teacher… which took over my life! But Sunday remained family time. By the time I retired the demands to use remote working in top of teaching hours were unsustainable.
I feel for the present generation of workers and don’t blame them for trying to get a work/life balance back. After all, they are expecting to work until they are 70 if they can’t get a decent private pension.

Indeed it doesn’t Doodledog. I wonder how some posters here would have felt if their solicitor worked strict hours, let things get behind and nobody covered for them when they were away. If I and my colleagues worked like that we would have had no clients - but possibly a clutch of negligence claims.

People on here keep saying that 'managers should. . .' whether that is about hiring cover for sick colleagues or not expecting too much of staff. IME it really doesn't work like that. Whatever they 'should' do, it was always my experience that they didn't. If people didn't cover and do the job of others as well as their own, the constant threat of closing the department was brought up again, and it was a case of doing it or risk losing your job.

It saw me off in the end, after the same two colleagues had their regular 'stress' absences for months at a time, and I was covering for them. I cared about the students, so would answer emails on holiday in the evenings and at weekends, as well as having to write lectures for absent colleagues, cover their marking and so on.

I know it's unfashionable to say so these days, but IMO if people's mental health is not up to the job they should leave, and let someone who can cope do it, not expect colleagues to cover for months on end. Nobody minds doing a bit more for a week or so if someone has flu, but continually doing two jobs for the price of one is untenable. When people take 6 months off three times in 10 years, plus odd weeks here and there when they are certain that 'the system' will allow it with no loss of pay, there should be a way of getting rid of them without being accused of bullying (which is what happened when someone did try to 'manage out' one of my persistently absent colleagues).

It's all very well to say that I shouldn't have done the cover, but it just doesn't work like that.

biglouis

*One thing I always maintained at work was that if staff did unpaid overtime they were sending out a false message to the employers that the department was adequately staffed when it wasn't. How can they make the right decisions about staff levels and recruitment needs if people are covering up the shortfall*

I agree 100%. If there are not sufficient staff to do the work within their assigned hours then that is a management problem and not an employees "not working hard enough" problem. The management should hire in more workers to cover for staff leave and sickness.

Not doing the work of others while they are away or on leave is another way of "quiet quitting". Rather than openly refusing you shift the extra work to the bottom of the pile and prioritise your own tasks first. Then you dump it back on their desk when they re-appear. No one is going to pay you two wages for doing two jobs.

If you don’t do someone else’s work if they’re away they’re not going to do yours when you’re away are they? Cutting off your nose? And not exactly being a good colleague. An employer can’t be expected to carry surplus staff just to cover for occasional absences, and not all jobs are suitable for temps. I wouldn’t have liked being a colleague of yours - not to mention being someone waiting for this work that wasn’t being done.

I’m two years three months off retiring and working as hard as ever. Would hate to think my younger colleagues ever thought otherwise. Couldn’t slack anyway I work in childcare overworked underpaid but I chose it!

One thing I always maintained at work was that if staff did unpaid overtime they were sending out a false message to the employers that the department was adequately staffed when it wasn't. How can they make the right decisions about staff levels and recruitment needs if people are covering up the shortfall

I agree 100%. If there are not sufficient staff to do the work within their assigned hours then that is a management problem and not an employees "not working hard enough" problem. The management should hire in more workers to cover for staff leave and sickness.

Not doing the work of others while they are away or on leave is another way of "quiet quitting". Rather than openly refusing you shift the extra work to the bottom of the pile and prioritise your own tasks first. Then you dump it back on their desk when they re-appear. No one is going to pay you two wages for doing two jobs.

Also not an option for me or my colleagues as we worked in Mental Health. I was nursing in a busy day hospital and as a CPN but we all attended the social gatherings which were always good fun

I spent the greater part of my working life on time critical projects, so no.

I did work with a few people who seemed to spend their working lives 'quietly quitting' though I don't think they meant to. Out of their 8 hour day they would spend the first hour of the day getting coffee and chatting about last night, interrupting others at the same time. An hour before lunch they would start winding down and working out where they were going/what they were doing/applying makeup/finding out what everyone else was doing. An hour after they got back would be catching up on what happened at lunchtime (usually nothing). The hour or so before they were due to leave would be all about what everyone was doing for the evening. So they would work about four hours out of the eight they were getting paid for. Some of them actually thought they were being paid for being in the office, rather than for the work they performed while they were there, and thought they were working hard by turning up for their contracted hours everyday. Our jobs depended on delivering IT products to an agreed quality and timescale (aircraft carriers, submarines, train and other transport systems) and anyone not giving 100% was quietly shifted to a job out of the way until they took the hint and left.

Never heard of 'quiet quitting' but it's summed me up perfectly. I only do two days a week now and I hit my target and do everything I need to do, but no more.

I was not quitting - quietly or otherwise - I was simply getting on with devoting work time to work and family time to family.

The amount of hours that teachers work over and above their paid hours is disgraceful.

One thing I always maintained at work was that if staff did unpaid overtime they were sending out a false message to the employers that the department was adequately staffed when it wasn't. How can they make the right decisions about staff levels and recruitment needs if people are covering up the shortfall?

There is nothing at all ethical about working unpaid time; and there certainly is nothing ethical about employers who expect this.

My work ethic was that I would give my all during work time and do a good job. What I did out of work time was my own business and the employer had no rights over that time.

Germanshepherdsmum

Luckygirl3

Sounds entirely reasonable to me. Do what you are paid to do and no more.

This Us-imported idea of your job/company being your life is unacceptable and unhealthy.

Good for anyone who takes a stand on this.

That’s not what you call a work ethic is it? Certainly won’t help you to get promotion or a pay rise. Sadly, though, exactly the attitude I encountered when I worked in local government.

It is an entirely reasonable work ethic - and totally ethical! What is unethical is asking people to work unpaid.

I devoted my time at work to my job - I did it well and got good results and was highly thought of. But I did none of it outside my paid hours - I devoted that time to my family. That is how thi9ngs should work.