'Quiet quitting' is a phrasing where employers and employers' media control the narrative.

If I am B2B I am not giving a customer 'more service' than what is being asked.

If I am a consultant I am delivering _exactly_ what is spec'ed by who's hiring.

If I go to a lawyer or an accountant and ask them to 'go the extra mile' they will ask me to go contact another professional.

The asymetry of employer/employee dynamics _specially_ in american and asian cultures is really quite impressive.

>quiet quitting—that is, doing only what’s in their job descriptions and no more.

Yeah, Why would I choose to do additional labor for my employer for free?

Is paying the agreed $5 for a $5 item instead of paying $6 'quiet stealing'?

Quiet quitting is a thing because of quiet firing. Corporations have long since abondened the concept of rewarding ground employees for anything, the only way to get substantial raises is frequent job hopping already

> For much of the past two years, executives have largely put up with this.

Record profits tend to do that.

But anyway, quiet quitters have decided that it's just business and not their life. Telling them that they might get "real fired" reinforces that viewpoint. You aren't getting them back with threats like that.

> Managers at all levels should form lists of employees to let go if better or harder-working talent becomes available, says Jay McDonald, an executive coach who sits on the board of several Atlanta-area companies.

What a tone deaf statement. Conveniently Jay McDonald defines "better or harder-working talent" as people who are willing to perform additional labor for free.

I am by no means an "Eat the rich" kind of person...but I sure do understand why that sentiment is getting more popular when "executive coaches who sit on the board of several companies" have the balls to make a statement like this, especially now, given the current economic issues we're facing.

Every time a QQ article shows up on HN the conversation circles around the phrase itself. Questions/statements like "How is doing your job quitting?" and "This is just some nonsense the media cooked up to scare people."

I'm not trying to detract from that, but I'd really like to ask about the "Why"; why is this narrative happening now? It is not as if businesses have just now starting trying to get more out of their employees. That has been the case for time immemorial. Is it because the economy is down? This isn't the first downturn in the economy since the advent of social news. Is it a """post"""-pandemic, getting people back into the office scare tactic?

I'd like to get some broad opinions about the timing, if possible.

EDIT: I realized that all the possibilities I listed point to businesses being bad actors, I didn't really intend to paint it that way. I'm open to considering both side.

How is doing your job description “quiet quitting”? I thought it meant doing nothing at all or much less than what is expected. This feels like propaganda.

Go ahead and fire me, I am fulfilling my contract and not doing anything extra because it's a suppliers market in jobs right now. Why would I work myself to death for little / no recognition and no extra pay?

If you fire me, I'll have a job at your competitor in 24 hours, if not them, then someone else. I have 5 revenue streams deliberately so I cannot be abused by a tyrannical employer.

We can work together, or not, but I'm not sacrificing my heath for your crappy company, it's not 1890 anymore, so get real.

If your business cannot be viable without squeezing employees, then that's not a business I want to exist in this world, so I hope you go bankrupt.

"Surely quite fired" is when your employer only pays you what they're required to, they don't give you extra money because "were all in this together" etc?

Isn't fast tracking to a layoff the entire point of quiet quitting..?

Can't read the article, any additional links?

undefined