Here’s what lurks beneath the ‘quiet quitting’ trend
By: Rachel Marsden
PARIS — “Quiet quitting” is the latest trend spawned on social media that
encourages workers to do the bare minimum required to stay employed while
refusing to go above and beyond. It’s easy to write off those who coined the
term as inherently lazy. But it’s not quite that simple or limited. At least
half of the U.S. workforce is now comprised of “quiet quitters,” according to a
Gallup poll published last month. And there’s a lot of blame to go around.
It’s safe to say that the young people who adhere to the concept are generally
those who have been catered to their entire work lives. Some of us in older
generations have never chosen opportunities based on whether there were free
snacks, a nap room, or a foosball table at the office. But the younger
generation entered the workforce at a time when the competition for workers was
so stiff that perks could make the difference. So they grew accustomed to being
spoiled by their employers.
But there was a catch with these perks. Most of them are geared to making you
hang around longer at work and to consider the workplace as a sort of second
home. So when the Covid pandemic hit and everyone shifted to home working, the
siren call of the bed or TV in the next room — or of your own foosball table —
led to resentment over management’s demands to be present and logged onto the
corporate platform. Before Covid, you could be present at work while napping or
playing an arcade game, and still get credit for “working”. Then suddenly, in
the Covid era, you couldn’t. All that fun and freedom was yanked away and they
were stuck staring at their job in all its bare naked glory. And some of those
jobs clearly looked much better with fancy clothes on. Nothing makes a worker
acutely aware of how much they’re actually working than a home office with
keystroke logging software. Unless, of course, they love their job so much that
they don’t notice time flying by. But how many fit into that category?
And herein lies yet another problem. The digital economy has created many jobs
that are widely available and well-paying, but intellectually not that
compelling except to a much narrower segment of the population than actually
work in those positions. How many of these workers actually feel like they’re
doing something meaningful and not just collecting a fat paycheck? How many of
them work to live instead of live to work, or at least feel a sense of life
purpose in their work?
One could argue that you don’t need to feel fulfilled at work and that you
should just get on with it and be grateful that you’re not living on the
streets. That’s a valid point, particularly when just starting out in the
workforce and lacking experience. But it’s also not likely that the “quiet
quitting” movement applies to these workers, in practice. Or at least it
shouldn’t if they had any brains. It’s hard to imagine a faster way to get
drop-kicked out of a minimum wage gig in favor of the next guy standing in line
than acting like the company should revolve around you. Presumably, we’re
talking about people who are at least in career-track positions and whose salary
includes some flexibility for demands to be made of them.
The “quiet quitting” movement implies a lack of purpose in work since it
suggests that workers should separate their own ego from what they do. How sad
that so many workers are apparently in a situation where they feel that they
don’t feel at one with what they do. Clearly the money that seduced many of them
into these jobs really can’t buy happiness.
But are employers also to blame for contributing to the problem by creating work
environments which, despite the perks, are largely toxic and not conducive to
wanting to go the extra mile? The answer arguably lies here in France.
For all the romanticization by Americans of French work life, the five weeks of
annual paid vacation, and labor strikes in favor of better rights and
privileges, the reality is much less appealing.
Before moving to France nearly 15 years ago, it was hard to imagine why the
relationship between bosses and workers here was so tense, and it was easy to
chalk it up to French workers being spoiled brats in search of ever more
entitlements. Aside from the infamous French labor strikes, there has even been
a case of factory workers of the U.S. company, Caterpillar, taking their
managers hostage at the office. But after spending some time working inside
French companies, it doesn’t take long to realize that the working conditions
generally aren’t conducive to actually wanting to be at work, even when you love
what you do.
The average French workday can basically be broken down as 30 percent lunch, 20
percent coffee or smoke breaks, 30 percent drama and intrigue — which leaves
about 20 percent of the workday for actual work. Since there isn’t much
productivity during the actual workday, in many French companies there’s an
unspoken contest between colleagues to see who can stay the latest after
quitting time. The “quiet quitter” who leaves on time is frowned upon, even if
they spent their day at the desk or worked through the two-hour lunch in order
to do so. These people often end up being targeted by the boss and by colleagues
for harassment as a result of refusing to go above and beyond the
black-and-white terms of their contract. The end result is a largely
unproductive, resentful work environment for everyone. But is the “quiet
quitter” really at fault here?
The quiet quitting debate should be taken as a sign that something is wrong with
the western workforce. But the solution — and where to place the blame — may not
be as obvious or simple as it seems.
COPYRIGHT 2022 RACHEL MARSDEN