The term “quiet quitting” gained traction on social media, quickly evolving from a viral TikTok trend to a serious topic of discussion. At its core, it describes the act of fulfilling your job duties without going above and beyond. It’s about doing what’s expected of you, and no more. This might mean skipping out on optional work events, not responding to emails after hours, or generally disengaging from the hustle culture that often permeates many workplaces.

For some, quiet quitting is a way to reclaim their personal time and prioritize their well-being. It’s a reaction to feeling burnt out, undervalued, or taken advantage of. For others, it’s seen as a slippery slope towards disengagement and a lack of ambition.

Setting Boundaries vs. Checking Out: Unpacking the Nuances of Quiet Quitting

The crux of the debate lies in how we define “quiet quitting.” Is it simply a more palatable term for setting healthy boundaries, or is it a passive-aggressive form of workplace rebellion?

Arguments for Quiet Quitting as Boundary Setting:

• Employees have the right to prioritize their well-being and personal lives outside of work.
• Setting boundaries can prevent burnout and improve overall job satisfaction.
• Quiet quitting can encourage employers to re-evaluate unreasonable workloads and expectations.

Arguments Against Quiet Quitting as Counterproductive:

• It can foster a culture of minimal effort and hinder career progression.
• It can damage relationships with colleagues who are still invested in going the extra mile.
• It doesn’t address the root causes of burnout, such as toxic work environments or poor management.