Newsflash - Quiet Quitting Is Not New.

There is constant talk of the 'Quiet Quitting' revolution, but is it really new? I keep seeing articles on the topic and TikTok videos. Lordt I love TikTok. These creators are brilliant. Check out @saraisthreads if you're on TikTok, respectfully, thank you. Because of all of this, these thoughts have been pinging around in my head for awhile. The phrase is somewhat of a misnomer, such in that the person is not actually quitting, they are instead limiting their efforts to what is within their job description and not going above and beyond the job description. They're rejecting the culture of the hustle. They're choosing to work to live and not to live to work.

When I see this discussion online and in articles, it generally has a negative connotation but people fail to realize it simply is people doing the job they were hired to do. This should not be a negative. If you as an employer find yourself needing the bulk of your employees to consistently go above and beyond 24/7/365, I have something to tell you - you, my friend, are understaffed.

Quiet quitting is an employer problem, not an employee problem, so please stop making it about the employee.

I had a boss who in later years became a co-worker who used to use the metaphor of a see-saw when referring to employees and workloads. Employees will always find a way to balance their own see-saw. People, this was somewhere around 2009 when I had this discussion - the concept of Quiet Quitting is not new, it's just has a snappy new alliterative name and has a connotation that negatively represents employees, so it's caught on.

Back to this 'revolution' being an employer problem. At some point it became the norm, at least in the US that it is expected for employees to consistently over and out perform and if the employee isn't then they're looked at negatively. Imagine that - being looked at negatively because you simply come in and do the job you have been hired to do, even if you do it well. That's insane. There are plenty of people who still go above and beyond, and guess what? A lot of them are mentally and physically tired. Why you ask? Because they consistently get nothing in return for their efforts aside from the standard 3% raise that every other employee in their company gets. When an employee goes through enough years of that, how can an employer expect that employee to continue on that trajectory? What is their incentive? They have no incentive, and once they realize that they will start to balance their see-saw.

It's not a new concept, it's just a new name. These are not bad employees, they're tired, they're dejected. It's sad actually. Gone are the days of people spending decades at a company because companies are not building mutual trust with their employees. I just left my company of twenty one years, and let me tell you, it was HARD. I don't foresee many entering the workforce in 2022 spending that amount of time with one company. That's not necessarily a bad thing either. I loved my time with my company, but in the two plus decades since I entered the post college workforce I can see the change in employees, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Just like the rise of unions, Quiet Quitting is another sign of the rise of the individual working trying to take back some of their autonomy. Employers need to wake up and listen to what employees are telling them. Are they looking to get rewarded for more effort if they put it forth, or is there a need to simply expand their workforce in order to properly handle the amount of work that is actually present.

To my future employers: Y'all don't need to panic about me, but this is a fun topic to get your thoughts on, let's chat!

xoxo

iamfunchris