OT: WFH, Quiet Quitting, and Overemployment

Based on my observations:

- many businesses are reducing square footage if they can and at the same time making what they keep nicer to make it more appealling for folks to come in (more collaborative work space, nicer features, better technology) - building owners who have the means are also investing in things like spec suites and building amenities to make their buildings more appealling and competitive.  Real Estate deals tend to include a lot more capital in an effort to preserve the optics on $/sq ft - so the leasee gets a better economic deal and the owners show "strong" rental rates.

- the shift in mindset around wfh is not surprising/new info but it IS a shift from say 2019.  It's not going back to how it was and folks mandating 8x5 in-office attendance seem to be setting themselves up for higher attrition unless there is something special/unique about the place (e.g., SpaceX or Tesla are somewhat unique places to work so the balance of power might be different).  I think "hybrid" can mean a lot of things but either way the days of everyone going to work in an office M-F 8-5 may still exist for some; but is gone for most.  But I don't think it goes away - the benefits of in-person collaboration are very real.

- I also think the concept of "WFH" is broadening from "I live in this part of town and work in this other part of town" to "I live in this part of the country/world but the company I work for is in this other part of the country/world".  Certainly outsourcing has sort of been doing that for a lot of businesses for maybe 25 years - but the shift in employees doing that seems pretty real to me.

- I don't have enough experience on the freelance point you make to have an informed opinion but it makes sense; the attachments of Person X:Company Y is a lot more fluid.  Certainly some independent contractors have done that but I could see it being more common and some side hustles have been ushering that concept in for awhile

This "quiet quitting" idea is silly to me. It is just another iteration of "working for the weekend" and not at all a new concept.  There's a hilarious Twitter thread a guy compiled that showed literally dozens of articles dating back to the 1890's with the same premise and often the exact phrasing: "people don't want to work anymore!" I think it's just a reflection of the fact that rich people get flustered when they can't extract maximum profit from the labor of others. 

Personally, I am a social worker and a therapist and my loyalty has almost exclusively been to the people I serve. Rarely has my employer earned the esteem for me to want to work "for" them.  I work hard in service of my mission, not to make some boss happy.  I don't judge anyone who has differing views, but I do think if a servile mindset was less engrained in society, it would negate some of the widespread predatory practices in the labor market. 

EDIT: I also work in a hybrid situation where I go to the office sparingly, and mostly work from home.  It's not been without some drawbacks, but the advantages strongly outweigh the negatives. 

Have worked from home for 25 years plus.  Will never work at an office again. 

Not "quiet quitting" but when it comes to the stupid decisions of healthcare administrators I choose to ignore them. Continue to do the important part with gusto--the part they'll never understand--caring for patients. The rest? Fire me. I dare you.

The term "quiet quitting" can go straight into the trash can.

I have no problem with employees simply doing what is asked of them. There is always a cost to going above and beyond, and there's no problem with setting boundaries to keep that cost acceptable.

I've always had the opportunity to work from home except when I have to teach, go to meetings, etc. I never did it, though, because I always thought there would be too many distractions and I wouldn't get anything done. Then once the pandemic came and everyone had to stay at home, I found that I really liked it. I'm actually more productive, and there's nothing better than doing some work with my dog sitting next to me. I don't think I'll ever go back to working in the office. (Plus, as a smoker it's nice not having to hide on a nonsmoking campus whenever I need a puff).  

To be honest, WFH has really helped my company from a talent acquisition standpoint. We're a medium-sized software company in the Midwest and were always a bit landlocked in terms of what talent we could attract to our fair city. Now we can cast a wider net and know that we don't have to sell anyone on picking up and moving. Maybe it should have always been this way but we needed the pandemic to show us there was another way. Employees are happier in general being able to choose where they work, and we have started hiring top of the industry type talent. Win win here (you know, other than the commercial real estate we'll never be able to offload).

it's not 'quiet quitting', 

it's 'acting your wage'....

I'm a business owner in a highly specialized field, who controls most hiring decisions.  Highly specialized fields pay a lot more but that is OK.

Conceptually, I have no problem with WFH, as long as you deliver.  I'm not a micro manager anyway, so it doesn't bother me where you work.

However, "quiet quitting" does not work in my industry in the slightest.  Because we pay well above national salary averages, we expect the output to be the same.  Anyone who is doing the bare minimum (i.e. "quiet quitting", "cruise control") will get let go quickly.

For the first time since the Reagan era, labor clearly has the upperhand and it's put management / ownership in a position they aren't familiar. I'll be curious how this plays out, but I think WFH is here to stay and will expand even further going forward.

Relatedly, there's now a legitimate trade-off for upper middle class workers who work hard (and make good money) who in the past have always gone into the office AND were expected to check their emails, voice mails at night. It seems very fair to me that if you're going to ask those folks to be "on call" or available 24-7, they can be "on call" anywhere in the country / world. 

If you can do your full-time job at home for 15 hours a week and they pay you for 40 and want to work a second job--good on you.

Basically retired/financially independent at 45 so I WFH or more accurately, from project to project on whatever my heart is in at the time. But to get there, it was from the opposite of "quiet quitting." I worked for others (in the office) at the same time as starting a business. I worked my ass off, eventually leaving W-2 work behind, built it big enough to sell, and then did it again with a second business.

It's not for everyone. A lot of fear and risk and is basically overemployment in the extreme as well for several years. But I bought my time back and having no commute is THE BEST.

One huge con: I used to have a lot of fun in the office. Job sucked. People were cool.

The new way of working is...well...working for me.

I'm a sole proprietor of a marketing consultancy/advertising agency geared to the needs of local businesses.

I can do about 90% of what I do from anywhere...whenever I want to do it.  As of two days ago, I'm now an empty-nester.  Now that meeting in person is less of an imperative, I'm looking forward to having the flexibility to travel a bit more and work mostly from home.  

Meetings that used to occupy a half a day (getting ready for the meeting, driving to the meeting, waiting for the meeting, having the meeting, having the meeting after the meeting, driving back from the meeting, settling back in to work) are now mostly held via Zoom and occupy about 30 minutes. 

Most of my clients seem to now prefer meeting via Zoom, as they are undoubtedly also enjoying the time efficiencies of meeting in this manner.  All of my client contacts are business owners who are pulled in countless directions and spend their days juggling the typical variety of issues that occupy the time of business owners.  If they can spend less time having to manage their marketing, it's to their benefit.  

As a result, I'm finding that I've gotten back about half of my work hours a week to either dedicate to leisure time or to more productive work like generating new business and implementing/executing on behalf of my clients.

I will say that I do miss some of the in-person contact...and I am a bit anxious about the impact of having fewer opportunities for the casual conversation that comes along with in-person meetings. As a result, I'm staying in touch with my clients on a more frequent basis via email and text than when in-person meetings were more commonplace. 

I would not want to be an owner of a large portfolio of office buildings right now.  

I was burned out during pandemic. Good money but a lot of responsibilities with high expectations during pandemic. I said heck with it. Found a WFH job with a slightly better pay and less expense. Go figure! And I work less. One good thing that came out of pandemic was there is a market out there and I don't have to keep doing what I am doing. Pandemic sucked and still sucks, but I have changed my life style. 

I now am a full time WFH and for me I love it.  I have been told there maybe some instances that I need to show up in person, not a problem.  There have been a few instances that has happened and I glad to support.

Now, I understand that WFH is not for everyone but for me and my circumstances it works well....

1) I eliminated a long and difficult commute.  Far less stress everyday

2) My wife and I are almost empty nesters (2 years away) so I enjoy the quiet time WFH

3) Most of my calls are with people globally so there is little real value for me to go to a work space.

I do miss the interaction sometimes with my coworkers.  To help address that, we have set up group outings (like going to a Tigers game) to connect.  This is really nice as it allows to catch up with everyone and all the water cooler chats can happen.

I do know of one major company that once had 7 office buildings but now have closed 6 of them and consolidated everyone in the metro area into the 1 main one by allowing WFH.  Some share a work space while other are full time WFH and only come in on rare instances.

Working in the LA area for a corporation. They have a nationwide range for my line of work. They pay our entire team exactly one dollar over the very bottom. Raises come in at 1/2 to 1/4th inflation yearly.

Sometimes employers do the quiet quitting. Shareholders are happy as a clam though. Also I work with some very talented people and they are in the same boat.

WFH is driving up the prices of motorhomes.

That's what I think about it all.

I was wondering what they are meaning by "quiet quitting". It's a misnomer for work/life balance? Odd to call it something derogatory when we've been told all along that having balance is best for your job performance.

As for over-employment. Go for it if you can manage it. Maximizing your time and skills to your benefit is your choice. Get done with what work requires of you and do more if you can to benefit yourself. 

Basically the pandemic exposed some of the widespread practices that are exploiting workers and WFH and the "issues" popping up are just things that are better for workers, and all this hullabaloo is a reaction to that.