• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    54
    ·
    7 months ago

    Quiet quitting is the practice of meeting minimum expectations with low moral or engagement. Underperforming could lead to termination for not meeting minimum expectations.

    • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      98
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Woosh.

      Also quiet quitting isn’t anything except a bullshit term dreamed up by capitalist crybabies.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        25
        ·
        7 months ago

        More like inexperienced middle-management. Discussing the team member’s reasons for disengagement could lead to a solution for them, or even multiple team members. Saying “I have nothing to complain about” proves ineffective leadership looking for cause to terminate.

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The only solution I would accept involves guillotines for the rich and the immediate end to the exploitation of the proletariat globally, so I don’t think that’s going to work for most middle managers.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            That’s fine. I’m just saying the managers in that headline are the problem, not the employees.

              • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Engagement and morale are measured independently from performance. The blurb states that the employees are meeting minimum expectations of performance, so the manager has “nothing to complain about.” I’m saying that’s bullshit leadership. If your employees are unhappy, you should ask them why and address any work-related dissatisfaction.

                • snooggums@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  13
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Someone doing their job without going above and beyond is a work related concern?

                  That is what we are talking about.

                  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    I’m on your side, but you keep missing the point. If you’re in charge of people that need to do a job, and while they are getting the work done, they seem miserable. Wouldn’t you give enough fucks to find out why? Standing there and saying, “well I can’t fire them because they’re doing the work” is the real problem. Not the definition of engagement.

        • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Engagement and disengagement are effectively separate forms of labor expected of an employee, though, and they’re virtually never formally codified. If I’m a coder and my job is to write code, don’t expect me to be enthused about writing terrible medical billing software. Enthusiasm and engagement are emotional labor, which I’m not compensated for, and which, to some extent, you can’t realistically expect me to demonstrate. I’m not able to “be engaged” beyond performing my tasks and whatever technical or administrative duties I’ve been assigned. Expecting me to contribute in a way orthogonal to that requires my job to be fundamentally different from what it actually is.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s fine if that’s how you like to work. All I’m saying is if an employee is silently quitting by doing the same work but shows less engagement/low morale, the solution isn’t for the manager isn’t to shrug their shoulders because you can’t fire them. That implies the manager’s goal is to terminate due to low performance, which is really shitty leadership.

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Well that’s completely fucked. That’s also illegal.

          Exactly. But a little illegal activity never stopped a corp. Wage theft is rampant, estimated at $50 billion a year.

          I don’t work for free.

          And that’s called quiet quitting in OP’s post.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I said this in another thread, but I’m not criticizing quiet quitting. I’m criticizing the managers’ response to it. If your employees are meeting expectations but unhappy, you should try to improve their work life, not shrug your shoulders because you don’t have a reason to fire them.