While the term itself might be relatively new, the concept of quiet quitting isn’t. In essence, it refers to the act of doing the bare minimum at work—fulfilling your job description without going above and beyond. This can manifest in various ways, such as:

• Sticking strictly to your contracted hours and refusing to work overtime.
• Not volunteering for additional projects or responsibilities.
• Disengaging from non-essential work-related activities.

Though seemingly straightforward, the interpretation of these actions is where the controversy lies.

Setting Boundaries or Checking Out: The Quiet Quitting Debate

Proponents of quiet quitting argue that it’s simply about setting healthy boundaries. In today’s hyper-connected world, the lines between work and personal life have become increasingly blurred. Many feel pressured to be “always on,” leading to burnout and dissatisfaction. Quiet quitting, they argue, is a way to reclaim personal time and prioritize well-being.

On the other hand, critics view quiet quitting as a passive-aggressive form of protest that ultimately harms both the individual and the company. They contend that disengagement leads to decreased productivity, stifled creativity, and a decline in overall work quality. Furthermore, they argue that it fosters a culture of apathy and resentment within the workplace.