this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
1118 points (98.6% liked)
Work Reform
10021 readers
345 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But isn't 'quiet quitting' the act of the employee giving the bare minimum needed to achieve a paycheck? It sounds like you're talking about getting employees to flat-out quit so the company doesn't need to pay benefits that come with being fired.
The concept of quiet quitting always struck me as bullshit in general. Like if your employees can do that, if they're able to just sort of log in and barely do anything, then they should. That's the manager's fault and responsibility to keep employees engaged or demand more from them. If the minimum amount of work isn't enough for the manager, then it isn't really the minimum, right?
Quiet quit is something else.
But I know what you're saying. For example twitter needed people to quit without being fired (due to how unemployment works in the US) and so it said no more WFH (without warning).
I suspect a lot of other companies are doing the same thing.