“`html
The Quiet Sibling of the Great Resignation?
The internet is buzzing with talk of “quiet quitting” – a seemingly new trend where employees do the bare minimum at work, clocking out mentally and emotionally the moment their shift ends. But is this truly a new phenomenon, or are we simply giving a trendy name to something many have experienced for years – the desire for healthier boundaries?
From Hustle Culture to Burnout: Why Quiet Quitting is Happening
For decades, many workplaces glorified the “always-on” employee, rewarding those who went above and beyond, often at the expense of their personal lives. This hustle culture, while seemingly beneficial for productivity, led to widespread burnout, particularly among younger generations.
Enter the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced a collective re-evaluation of priorities. Suddenly, remote work blurred the lines between professional and personal even further. The “Great Resignation” followed, with millions leaving their jobs in search of better conditions, flexibility, and a greater sense of purpose.
“Quiet quitting,” then, can be seen as a response to these pressures. It’s a way for employees, burned out and disillusioned, to reclaim some control over their time and energy.
Quiet Quitting or Setting Boundaries: What’s the Difference?
The term “quiet quitting” itself, however, is problematic. It frames disengagement as a personal failing, rather than a symptom of a larger systemic issue. Instead of viewing this trend as a wave of laziness, perhaps we should consider it a call for healthier boundaries.
Here’s the difference:
- Quiet Quitting: Implies a lack of effort and a disengaged attitude. It suggests a passive form of “getting back” at employers.
- Setting Boundaries: Involves actively communicating needs and limits. It’s about prioritizing well-being without sacrificing job performance.
