New buzzwords and phrases flutter through the human resources sector every now and then. Sometimes it’s a fancy new way to engage our employees, and sometimes it’s a red flag we should actively be looking for in order to keep our employees in check.
There are two phrases that are increasingly pinging this particular HR professional’s desk;
“Quiet Quitting” and “Quiet Cracking”.
Despite these two phrases sharing a hushed first word, both these phrases are screaming bloody murder into the void, and it’s important for employees to pick up on why.
Noiseless definitions
So what do these phrases mean?
Before we ask for a definition, we have to decide:
- Do we want the definition that employers are pushing?
Or
- Do we want to know what these phrases actually mean?
Let’s do both. You might want to take notes on this.
Quiet Quitting
Quiet Quitting – When an employee does the minimum requirements of their job, putting in no extra time, effort, or enthusiasm.
Mind you, “Quiet Quitting” is not when an employee goes below the minimum requirements, that’s simply an employee who is “slacking” and they get dealt with all the time by all HR departments.
This is an employer’s way of saying: “Our employees are working based on what they are hired to do, and are not doing everything else we want them to do but didn’t include in the employment contract.”
Think about it like this: If someone asks you to help them paint their garage door for a small fee, would you also paint the entire house, roof, and fence as well? No, of course not! You made a deal with the person to do a certain task – if that person needs assistance with another task, another request should be made and terms negotiated.
Let’s set this up in a slightly different way: If someone asks you to help them paint the garage door for a small fee, and then becomes angry at you for not also painting the entire house, roof, and fence as well as they feel you owe them to go above and beyond what you two initially decided upon – wouldn’t you list that individual as slightly psychotic in your phone-book and avoid them from now on?
Quiet Cracking
Quiet Cracking – When an employee feels stuck and disengaged from their job, yet shows up, does their job, and struggles with their feelings in silence.
The key here isn’t an employee who is facing difficulties at home – It’s an employee who is facing difficulties and does not trust their employer with their struggles. The key here is the lack of trust between the employee and employer, not the employee’s struggle.
But this phrase is an employer’s way of saying: “If the employee is struggling but still needs a paycheck to survive, it isn’t our fault that the employee dreads every second spent in the workplace and fears informing us of it.”
This is an employer who does not see their employees as human beings, but a statistic, a dehumanized resource necessary to get the job done. Because honestly, if the employer genuinely cared for their employees, they wouldn’t call it “Quiet Cracking”, but “why are we failing so hard that our own employees feel stuck and disengaged in their jobs and don’t trust us with their struggles?”.
Pop up quiz to all the employees out there: If you approached your employer regarding feeling stuck and disengaged in your job, and that you’ve been fearful of approaching your employer regarding this matter, would your employer:
- Lend you support and empower you in positive ways that will help you feel better and get back on track.
Or
- Terminate you for being disengaged from your work, slacking, and even use you as an example of what happens to employees who aren’t giving 178% to their job all the time.
I hope you answered the former.
But as an HR professional who often deals with detrimental settings in the workplace. When ever an employee confides in me that they are feeling stuck and/or disengaged in their job, yet plead with me not to inform the employer of the matter, that is a clear sign of active Employee Abuse that is being directed against that particular individual. My next step isn’t to help them talk to their employer, but to support and empower the employee to build a plan and momentum to get themselves out of there.
Silent importance
Anyone who has worked with abuse, whether it be child-abuse, spousal abuse, Employee Abuse, or what ever other abuse you can think of (there’s a ton of them), knows one tactic that abusers constantly use to keep their targets in place:
They will turn the situation around, making the target accountable – and entirely to blame – for it.
So the 101 on how to figure out who has abusive tendencies in a detrimental environment? Find the one who takes no accountability and operates a turntable even more proficiently than the world’s greatest DJ.
Through the years, I’ve seen the tables being turned on individuals, groups, whole departments, hell even the entire workforce by their employer. But to see it happen on an international basis, directed towards the entire workforce on all seven continents (sorry penguins), is a first.
And through the years I have noted a common concept arising in all abuse cases, whether they be spousal abuse, gender specific abuse, Employee Abuse, or just within dysfunctional families:
Protecting and preserving the image of the abuser is easier than facing the consequences of going up against the abuser.
For employees it is doubly so, as going up against an abusive employer essentially means termination, and even worse; continued abuse after termination in form of black listing and character assassinations resulting in difficulties of finding a new job.
This unfortunately means that in Employee Abuse, co-workers won’t hesitate to sacrifice the targeted employee in order to safe and maintain their own employment – and thusly hopefully avoid being targeted themselves.
Inaudible actions
Both of these phrases describe the normalization of Employee Abuse that has happened in our job markets, by not only laying the blame on the employees but also creating a victim of the “poor employer” who is only experiencing consequences of their actions – An action that all targets of abuse are intimately familiar with.
Some employees even try their best to work even harder, in order to prove to their employer that they “truly are not one of those quiet-folk” as their employers yeet out reprimands and terminations like almost-out-of-date pieces of candy, all the while justifying those actions with these two phrases.
Trying your hardest to “not be like the quiet-folk” isn’t protesting the phrases, it’s validating them.
The only protests against these phrases so far have been “what do employers expect” or “sounds about right” – Which incidentally aren’t protests, but an acquiesce to these unjust phrases, while justifying their claims.
Soundless protests
As the main focus of this article are two phrases, there is only one thing that can be done.
No, don’t reclaim them, these phrases don’t mean squat for employees and should be eradicated from our collective knowledge sooner than ASAP.
Make sure to rectify anyone who uses these phrases, and tell them why they are wrong.
- When an employee does as they’re hired to do, they are not Quietly Quitting, they are honoring their employment agreement while also valuing their personal life and time off.
- When an employee doesn’t share their struggles with their employer, they are not quietly cracking, they are showing physical signs of stress from the detrimental settings the workplace is offering, in the form of a freeze response, fawn response, and with a dash of learned helplessness in there as well.
And when someone utters “Quiet Cracking”, remember to also ask the employer/HR professional what do they intend to do about it, as it absolutely is their fault that an employee is cracking under pressure and feels they cannot ask their employer for support.
And don’t forget:
- Support your fellow co-workers.
Yes yes, I know, you will fear for your job. But do you want to know a secret?
Most employers are outnumbered by their employees, and further yet, no employer can operate without their employees.
What are they going to do? Have the CEO run all tasks by themselves? They ain’t no Nykia Hamilton!
Remember that.
Subdued conclusion
The writer of this article has been sticking her nose into Employee Abuse for some time now, working with both employees and employers alike to try and research detrimental cultures in the workplace, their origin and how to best tackle them.
If there is one thing she has learned, it’s that there is nothing that can be done – unless the employees themselves decide to take matters into their own hands and push for change.
No amount of third parties (HR professionals, unions, lawyers, or even law-makers) will make a dent into a detrimental culture, and the employers themselves see no reason to change what they feel ain’t broke.
If employees continue to stick their heads into the sand, internalize all responsibility for everything that the employer has done to them, and never question nor go against the social norm of Employee Abuse, nothing will ever change.
What do you intend to do?