• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I can give you a real answer if you’re sincere, but this tends to disappear into downvote oblivion.

    Quiet quitting is a sudden and noticeable shift, not in reduced performance, but engagement and morale. Increased negativity, pessimism, criticism, etc. It adversely affects team morale, often resulting in reduced performance of others. It’s more effective than you may think.

    A good manager would address this with questions to better understand the sudden change in job satisfaction, and meet those concerns with change. Most seem to be complaining that they don’t have a reason to fire the team member, which is why you always read about “continuing to meet performance expectations.” If a manager told me the latter, I’d address it as a failure of their leadership skills.

    • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 months ago

      I started quiet quitting after it came to light that the new hires with zero experience were being paid more than I was, someone who had been there for over a year, and already had 5 years of experience. I no longer give a shit about the company, because they made it clear they don’t give a shit about my contribution. If you want people to put in extra effort, you have to give them extra money. Once you cheat an employee, they’re not gonna get over it because of a pizza party. fucking pay them.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Again, it’s not about effort or results, but morale. Unequal pay is an absolutely justifiable reason for low morale.

    • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      You’re either lying or you’re simply misimformed. You didn’t mention staying late and doing extra work, which is what most people have meant when using that term to denigrate workers that do their job well but leave immediately after work is completed.

    • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Ah, that makes sense. I’m in the military, and we have a similar thing for people who are either due to transfer or retire in the next couple months: FIIGMO. It means “Fuck it, I’ve got my orders.” (For clarification, orders in this context are travel/Primary Change of Station/Retirement Orders, a written and signed document saying they’ll be leaving)

      It seems like a weirdly deliberate term for something that has been around forever and typically just attributed to low morale. It makes it seem like a person unhappy at work but just doing their job is somehow sticking it to their boss/company. I’ve dealt with a lot of people like that, both as a peer and a supervisor, and it was never them doing anything intentionally, just being unhappy (and most of the time it had nothing to do with the pay or conditions, just not being suited to the job or general attitude toward life). They could often be a blight on morale, though, so I see how it could be frustrating for supervisors (and peers, they made work miserable for everyone).