Examining the dynamics of quiet firing and its implications for employees and managers alike.
‘Quiet quitting’ may be the hottest term on most people’s lips, but ‘quiet firing’ is quietly making its rounds, evidenced by numerous posts on LinkedIn and Twitter. Packaged as a subtle strategy to dismiss an employee, quiet firing is a newly coined phrase for a tactic that has, in fact, existed since the dawn of office politics.
While quiet quitting is perceived as setting work boundaries where an employee honors only what they are paid to do (acting your wage), quiet firing is often seen as insidious, deceitful, and unjust. There are two extremes to quiet firing: one where a manager blatantly snubs an employee—keeping them out of meetings, ignoring their requests, and denying them any career progression; and the other where an employee is overloaded with projects, expected to work excessive overtime, and has leave requests frequently denied.
Firing is Not So Simple Math
A manager can, at their discretion, fire an underperforming employee, but it becomes a grey area when valid and legal reasons are needed to let someone go. That’s where quiet firing comes in; an under-the-radar method that pushes an employee, sometimes without justifiable reasons, to quit on their own terms and timeline.
For Sulaiman, a professional in the media industry in his late 30s, quiet firing is “when our boss stops caring enough about your work progress.” He adds, “But I know some people define it as making your working conditions so horrible that you will quit.”
Sulaiman defends quiet firing, suggesting it may be the proper response to an employee stagnating in their role after all efforts to motivate them have failed. “As long as I can justify that I have tried to help you, if my boss asks why this person is under my charge isn’t performing, then I can say I’ve tried to do this or help with that, but he doesn’t want to do anything about it.”
When asked if there was an element of guilt when deciding to quiet fire, Sulaiman replies with a firm “No.”
Quiet Firing Isn’t Black Or White
A quick search for ‘quiet firing’ on Twitter reveals various definitions, many from scorned employees. Bonnie Dilber, a Recruiting Manager for Zapier in Seattle, posted that quiet firing is characterized by a lack of feedback or praise, minimal raises, frequent cancellations of one-on-ones, exclusion from projects, and no discussions about career trajectories.
Her theory garnered over 2,000 shares and more than 1,200 comments, with some challenging her perspective. One user noted, “Unpopular opinion: It’s not always a bad manager; bad employees exist. Yes, there are better ways to go about it, but there are two sides to every coin.”
Another comment suggested that quiet firing is a strategic move to navigate legalities around termination, indicating that managers might deliberately make conditions uncomfortable to induce resignations without legal repercussions.
Quiet firing is understood as creating an environment that makes it nearly impossible for an employee to thrive. Darryl, 39, an account manager in a tech company, echoes this sentiment, stating, “Your manager or supervisor subtly makes things difficult for you, pushing you to the point where you decide you’ve had enough and want to leave.”
There are always two sides to every story, and while quiet firing is commonly viewed as a manager’s execution, it often lacks insight into what led to this reaction.
The Mechanics of Quiet Firing
Sulaiman recounts his experience with quiet firing, emphasizing his attempts to communicate with a content creator on his team about improving visibility and demonstrating eagerness in their work. His efforts, however, fell on deaf ears, as the employee resisted any change.
“At that time, I didn’t realize what I was doing was quiet firing. I consciously decided I was not going to help this person become better. After a while, it became about maintaining the minimum performance.”
Sulaiman kept the employee on even though their contributions were below expectations, believing that firing would be a quick solution to his issue. However, the employee remained a productive team member, which influenced Sulaiman’s decision to not terminate their employment.
The Toll of Being Quiet Fired
Making cutthroat decisions as a manager is never easy, especially when perceived through the lens of the employee. Most accounts of quiet firing revolve around the insidious build-up that leads to an employee realizing they are being quietly fired.
Kelly, 35, in real estate, shares her experience of being quietly fired, feeling overworked and unrecognized compared to a colleague. “It was very mentally exhausting because you don’t get recognition, sacrifice your social life, and are still stuck in this position.”
Darryl observed how quiet firing could swiftly occur when a new department head joined his team, leading to the unjust probation of a well-performing colleague who subsequently left due to heightened pressure and unattainable KPIs.
Is It the Manager’s Responsibility?
A common belief in discussions about quiet firing is that managers hold authority over employees and are responsible for their performance. Sulaiman argues that employees know their targets, and if they are underperforming while facing quiet firing, the fault lies with them.
He asserts, “I like to help all my employees be portrayed positively in the company. If your work speaks for itself, why would I need to make you look better?”
Conversely, Darryl believes the manager bears full responsibility for quiet firing. “Quiet firing will always lie with the employer because the intention of asking a teammate to leave is already there. It’s just a matter of how they plot to make this person leave without making themselves or the company look bad.”
Open and honest communication could eliminate the need for quiet firing, fostering a professional environment based on respect and transparency.
To Embrace Or To Resist?
Sulaiman’s experience reflects a situation where an employee’s stagnation warranted quiet firing. He believes that employees are aware of their responsibilities and performance expectations. If they fail to meet these requirements, they should expect consequences.
However, from an employee’s perspective, such as Kelly’s, being quietly fired can lead to anxiety and a sense of inadequacy. She recognized the cold treatment from her manager, which ultimately prompted her decision to leave.
Workplace Bullying? Not Necessarily.
Some view quiet firing as a form of workplace bullying; however, its non-confrontational nature makes this a debatable claim. Sulaiman believes it’s a rational reaction to a situation, while Darryl insists that it can have detrimental psychological effects, leading to feelings of inferiority.
The consensus among both is that quiet firing shouldn’t be labeled as bullying if the manager has engaged in sufficient conversations with the employee about performance. However, when a manager exercises authority whimsically, quiet firing can resemble bullying for personal motives.
Sulaiman concludes that quiet firing is an unintentional evil, a logical response to underperformance. Yet, the nuances surrounding quiet firing reveal a complex interplay between manager intentions and employee reactions.
