While the phrase might be new, the concept of “quiet quitting” isn’t entirely foreign. In essence, it refers to employees doing the bare minimum required of their job description, no longer going above and beyond, and mentally “checking out” while still physically present. This can manifest in various ways, including:

• Leaving work precisely on time
• Not volunteering for extra projects
• Disengaging from non-essential work activities

Reasons for Quiet Quitting

The rise of “quiet quitting” is often attributed to several factors, including:

1. Burnout and Stress: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated already existing issues of employee burnout, pushing many to prioritize their well-being over work demands.
2. The Great Resignation: As people re-evaluated their priorities during the pandemic, many opted for new careers or lifestyles, leaving remaining employees with heavier workloads and increased pressure.
3. Shifting Work-Life Balance: With remote and hybrid work models becoming more common, the boundaries between work and personal life blurred for many, leading to a desire for clearer demarcations.

Quiet Quitting vs. Setting Boundaries: The Debate

This is where the debate heats up. Proponents of the “quiet quitting” label argue it highlights a growing sense of apathy and disengagement among employees, potentially harming productivity and company culture. They see it as a passive form of protest rather than direct communication.

Conversely, others argue that “quiet quitting” is a misnomer. They believe it’s simply employees setting healthy boundaries by prioritizing their mental health and personal time. They argue that expecting employees to consistently go above and beyond is unrealistic and unsustainable. Instead, the focus should be on creating a work environment that respects employees’ time and well-being while providing clear expectations and fair compensation.