Jump to content

Talk:Quiet quitting

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Concept

[edit]

The idea of the work ethic has been used before. The only thing new is the title. Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk / contribs) 18:01, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know if there is another article descibing this particular phenomenon? I have modified the lead that it is only the term that is new. PhotographyEdits (talk) 07:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any more information about the opposition to this phenomenon?Rainbowsquid33 (talk) 11:05, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Rainbowsquid33 I saw some information on some of the sources about the opposition -- plus, I think I can safely assume the bosses of the quiet quitters wouldn't be too happy with them either once they were discovered quiet quitting. :) Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk / contribs) 15:25, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to tag you, so hereby: @Urban Versis 32. PhotographyEdits (talk) 07:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PhotographyEdits, I couldn't find another article describing this ethic, therefore I think it should still be an article for now. I'll do some more research and see if I can find a similar article. Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk / contribs) 23:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The IP user below suggested the article Work-to-rule, therefore I added it to the "See Also" section and updated the Labor template with this article and included it on this article, as seen on the Work-to-rule article. Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk / contribs) 01:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Urban Versis 32 I think that is a great suggestion. I'm not even sure if these are different concepts. If so, this article would be a WP:POVFORK. Might be suitable for a merge. PhotographyEdits (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PhotographyEdits Maybe, but the phenomenons occurred at different time periods. I would suggest a merge discussion, especially because this article may not be considered WP:NOTABLE by some. Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk / contribs) 18:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the notability is an issue here, but sure, I'll open a merge discussion. PhotographyEdits (talk) 18:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PhotographyEdits Ok, thanks. Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk / contribs) 00:13, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the merge template to the article Throughthemind (talk) 07:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Work To Time

[edit]

Similar to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work-to-rule 49.186.33.53 (talk) 21:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Planned slacking in the workplace comes in two main flavours. There's the old trade union concept of the Work to Rule, in which people agree to reduce their productivity through strict compliance with rules and regulations, and there's the modern concept of quiet quitting in which an individual chooses to reduce their productivity while remaining strictly compliant with the rules and regulations. Quiet quitting is a fashionable phrase that's attracting attention at the moment, and at issue in this RfC is whether to cover the two flavours in one article or two separate ones.
People commenting in this merger discussion divide into two camps. There's the camp I call the splitters, who advocate separate articles with perhaps a hatnote. They reason that the purpose of a work-to-rule is to exert pressure on an employer in an industrial dispute, while the purpose of quiet quitting is to relieve pressure on an employee, often for reasons of mental health and/or work-life balance. And there's the camp I call the lumpers, who by and large recognise that these two closely-related concepts could be distinguished from one another into separate articles, but feel that they don't have to be, and since sections of both articles would repeat each other, the lumpers feel it's preferable to combine them.
I see no policy basis on which to prefer one camp over the other, and the lumpers are noticeably more numerous than the splitters, so I will say that there is consensus to merge quiet quitting into work-to-rule. The appropriate edits may be made.
I hope this helps. Comments, criticism or complaints about this close should be directed to my talk page in the first instance.—S Marshall T/C 19:55, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've added merge discussion templates for potentially merging this article into Work-to-rule, which redirect here. Throughthemind (talk) 08:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: These are the same topic, just different names. The only thing is what to actually call the article. I would say "work-to-rule" is more long-lasting and so we should go with that.~BappleBusiness[talk] 02:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree. Quiet quitting is an individual choice. Work-to-rule was and remains a tool used by labour unions as a form of organised protest in the face of increasing demands beyond the scope of work laid out in an employment contract (eg, working over-time or extra shifts, not picking up someone else's phone line, taking set breaks at set times regardless of the situation, etc).It has been used by unions representing teachers, emergency services, transport services and the health service, among numerous others, in the UK and almost certainly anywhere else where an organised labour force exists. Quiet quitting is framed more in terms of a lifestyle choice and a rejection of the idea that individuals should prioritise work and career over their personal lives and interests. While there are similarities in practice, there is a key distinction between the two. SingularStephen (talk) 13:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this merge. Initially I agreed, but it seems to be a different subject from work-to-rule. This thread explained it clearly for me. Unlike work-to-rule, this is not a protest against employers, but a more general move towards a better work life balance. The subjects are related, but there is a difference that I think warrants a separate article. PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. "Quiet quitting" would make more sense as a subsection of the work-to-rule article, possibly describing it as a generalisation or adaptation of the tactic to establish a healthier workplace culture/work-life balance. wwklnd (talk) 15:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. "Quiet quitting" is the individualized application of work-to-rule without labor organization, but the tactic is essentially the same. "Quiet quitting" should be a subsection in the work-to-rule article. GenericHumanoid (talk) 22:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify: Support merging "quiet quitting" into a section within work-to-rule outlining the individual application of the tactic for individual gain. These actions are not completely different, the main differences are based in the rationale for them GenericHumanoid (talk) 18:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose They are complete opposites! Work-to-Rule is driven by the empowerment of unions and a socialist mentality to (supposedly) reduce burnout and promote an ever elusive equality amongst worker.
Quiet Quitting, on the other hand doesn’t come from workers collectively uniting for equality for all. It spawns from the individual’s recognition of the disheartening reality that socialistic employers have disincentivised working harder when they fail to reward productivity above the averages. So, the individual Quietly Quits over working and just blends in with the averages.
Again, completely different subjects Econo-Accuracy (talk) 00:34, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - By definition, "work-to-rule" refers to a tactic of collective worker action, such as a union might coordinate. By its nature, "quiet quitting" is an individual response to perceived or real imbalances or mismatches between personal aspirations and work expectations. Potentially both topics could be merged under a hypothetical shared article, but then the scope would be expanded to the point where a new discussion on breaking up the article might well result. Note that a third article on the complementary term "quiet firing" might be possible. Unless a different article can be identified with the same shade of meaning, it makes the most sense to keep it separate for now. Albanaco (talk) 20:34, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - the terms are clearly used differently. Quiet Quitting is used for your own self-improvement and well-being, Work-to-Rule is a form of protest against your employer to intentionally make it more difficult for them. They are not the same.71.11.5.2 (talk) 18:37, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per GenericHumanoid's arguments. As for an apparent perceived difference between the two, I'm not perceiving one -- while the motivations between work-to-rule and quiet quitting may be different, they both appear to have the same goal (improve the quality of life of whoever is carrying out the practice) and have the same end result. --Rob Kelk 20:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Although I had already opposed the move, I want to add that this term might even count as the WP:COMMONNAME for work-to-rule as a whole these days. Could be some recentism bias, but I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be the more long term significant name. PhotographyEdits (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Other Language (German)

[edit]

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innere_K%C3%BCndigung 46.114.140.12 (talk) 06:38, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Quiet_quitting&oldid=1204977838"