Quiet quitting

[philostam]

Partly it's because of the bullshit office jobs that humans aren't meant for. Partly it's because education system is not producing enough professionals the world needs - so people go in debt to work 9 to 5 in the office and be miserable. Partly it's because personal responsibility.

I am talking mostly about men here...I think they suffer more in office 9 to 5 environments.

It's a complex issue in any case. And it's really hard to reinvent yourself, change course, learn new skills...While at the same time having to work to survive and probably having debts to pay off.

 

[Sidis Coruscatis]

Partly it's because education system is not producing enough professionals the world needs - so people go in debt to work 9 to 5 in the office and be miserable. Partly it's because personal responsibility.

Yes, definitely. Too many kids go for the most useless degrees while accruing debt and then end up in an office position they resent, which just perpetuates their poverty because they have no practical value or budgeting skills to plan a way out. But I always put responsibility first because that's the thing you can do at any time, even if you already made bad choices.

 

[Matty]

Quiet quitting is essentially going to work, collecting a paycheck, and performing the minimum duties of your job. Common techniques include being late to your job and leaving early, taking excessively long lunches and breaks, playing on your phone during work instead of whatever you are being paid to do.

Is it ethical? Do you do it? What do you think about it?

My biased question: isn't it more ethical to QUIT and find a job that you want to work than to take somebody's money and refuse to work? And if there isn't a job that you want to have.... Maybe introspect about why you think you are above working.

To clarify, I think a lot of people do these things when they are suffering from depression or stress in their life. This is not what I'm talking about. Quiet quitting is not being overwhelmed by your life and having a hard time keeping up at your job. It is choosing not to do your job.

I just couldn't fathom taking money and not upholding my end of the agreement.

Going above and beyond the expectations of employment is something I'll do for a time, just because I like a job well done, for my own satisfaction, but eventually I'll want commensurate pay. Short changing an employer, on the other hand, is really repellent to me.

 

[aeon]

People typically quit—quietly, or otherwise—their bosses, not their job.

And sometimes that boss fires them when they don’t meet unreasonable expectations.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[slant]

People typically quit—quietly, or otherwise—their bosses, not their job.

And sometimes that boss fires them when they don’t meet unreasonable expectations.

Cheers,
Ian

I feel like this is just normal life though. Hasn't everyone had at least one job where their personality wasn't a good fit with manager or the work culture? I took temp jobs for an entire year in different industries doing different types of work to try to get a sense of

A. What work do I enjoy doing?

And

B. What am I looking for in a company and work culture?

As a worker you have to find the right fit for you. Hi can't just apply at the nearest place to work where you live and expect it to be a perfect fit. If it's important that you live right next to the place you work, you are making a choice that you prioritize that over other aspects of work.

In the end, it's great that the girl got fired because the job wasn't a good fit. I think the manager will find he isn't able to find a candidate who meets his exacting standards, but he'll have to go through enough employees to understand that.

 

[aeon]

As a worker you have to find the right fit for you. Hi can't just apply at the nearest place to work where you live and expect it to be a perfect fit. If it's important that you live right next to the place you work, you are making a choice that you prioritize that over other aspects of work.

In the end, it's great that the girl got fired because the job wasn't a good fit.

Are you suggesting that being on-call from 5am to 10pm for minimum wage, with no on-call bonus, would be a good fit for someone? Not simply that someone would be willing.

Wondering,
Ian

 

[slant]

Are you suggesting that being on-call from 5am to 10pm for minimum wage, with no on-call bonus, would be a good fit for someone? Not simply that someone would be willing.

Wondering,
Ian

If somebody is willing to do that then yes. If you're unwilling to do it clearly it's not for you. I have regularly worked 12 hour shifts for my job when it was necessary, it was voluntary, it was difficult but we really needed it. I did it for about 2 months straight and worked an extra 5 weeks that year in time worked beyond my shift. You would be surprised at what people will do when they care about their job and enjoy it. I was making $13 at the time, that's not really that much of a difference.

Also, I regularly work off the clock to get projects done and extra work that I wouldn't be paid to do on the clock. It's important to me.

 

[Jon32galham]

I enjoy working and doing my best and I would to my best even if I was an actual indentured servant. I would not feel life was worth living if I did not do my best and work with integrity . This was the way I have always been.

If others only do what they’re payed to do they’re not working with “integrity”. But you, getting used by your company would happily work as an “indentured servant.” My apologizes that’s the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever read. Do you think indentured servants were treated with respect? I guess in comparison to slaves they were.

 

[slant]

If others only do what they’re payed to do they’re not working with “integrity”. But you, getting used by your company would happily work as an “indentured servant.” My apologizes that’s the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever read. Do you think indentured servants were treated with respect? I guess in comparison to slaves they were.

It just sounds like a lack of gratitude and poor work ethic to me! I don't feel taken advantage of. I could quit at any time and get a different job if I didn't like it. I enjoy my work and my company. I'm fine with if people want to actually quit their job and leave. And as long as people don't expect promotions or bonuses for only doing the bare minimum, I suppose if you get your job done then that's good, too. I have seen people using the term quiet quitting to justify sub par work, basically doing what you can "get away" with. This victim mentality that we are like slaves to corporations is a pretty big insult to actual slavery. Slaves would often be killed when they tried to leave. They were beaten and physically abused.

If you can quit a job and find work somewhere else, no need to feel sorry for yourself. Do your job. If you don't feel like your job is worth the money you're getting paid that seems like it's actually your problem for having agreed to do the job.

This attitude is like if somebody is sitting closer to an object at the dinner table and I ask them, "can you please pass that?" It would be SO easy to just pass the food but instead somebody is like "that's not my problem, just reach further." Are you kidding me?? Asking somebody to do a good job is TOO BIG of an ask? You won't go above and beyond unless you get some special reward for it? Selfish behavior, entitled attitude. If a company is not rewarding you properly you leave. I've gotten promotions as a result of my conduct, it had benefitted me. Believe me if it didn't I would leave.

I think a lot of people don't understand that you can't do unskilled labor like be a coffee barista and expect to be paid $16 an hour for it. That's crazy. Anybody could be trained to do unskilled labor, that's the point. If you view putting in extra effort to stand out in a company as being taken advantage of, no wonder you are struggling financially. You have no motivation to do anything unless you're already getting the benefit of it. If you are trying to lose weight it takes time eating healthy and working out for that to happen. You can't just show up to a job and expect to get paid handsomely for that - what makes you worth being paid more than others on your team? The company only makes so much money and if they have to invest $50,000 per employee on unskilled labor, that's going to make it hard for them to be profitable. Think about the money they have to pay for short term disability per employee, 401k, health insurance. Have you ever crunched the numbers of what you ACTUALLY cost your employer and what they ACTUALLY spend to keep their business afloat?

God forbid you have to run your own company and provide all of these things, and then you get an employee who wants to only do the bare minimum. Perfect, we will pay you the bare minimum, win win! Then the employee who is deliberately putting in the bare minimum gripes about getting paid so little... We don't pay extra money for a coffee drink that's shitty so the coffee drink will "improve". Somebody has to have a finished product that is worth more money before labor is going to be rewarded for it. That's why you go the extra mile... To demonstrate you are capable of performing labor that is worth more. If you don't get paid more, you leave, not whine about it and put in the minimum effort. That is such a passive, regressive way to live life.

 

[Roses In The Vineyard]

 

[aeon]

lack of gratitude

poor work ethic

I’m not sure why you keep wanting to turn a simple business agreement into a moral test, or opportunity to judge others as lacking.

Employer offers job, jobseeker agrees to terms, employee does what they were hired to do, employee gets paid, rinse, lather, repeat.

There’s no other consideration here.

only doing the bare minimum

sub par work

I’m not sure why you keep introducing this. The employee does exactly what they were hired to do, to the satisfaction of the employer, and the employee is paid for that work.

If and when the employer demands additional work and/or time that is not part of the original agreement, and offers no commensurate increase in compensation, and the employee refuses, but continues to do the job they were hired for, and are paid for, that is the pejorative “quiet quitting.”

Quiet quitting has nothing to do with bare minimums, or poor quality work.

You won't go above and beyond unless you get some special reward for it?

No special reward is required.

If an employer wants above and beyond, they need to be willing to pay for it if they reasonably expect to get above and beyond.

The exchange is: labor ↔ wages.

Selfish behavior

entitled attitude

Your judgmental position has been made so very clearly.

Expecting to be fairly paid in exchange for one’s labor is neither selfish, nor entitled.

unskilled labor

No such thing. Propaganda term.

Anybody could be trained to do unskilled labor

If they need to be trained to do it, it is, by definition, skilled labor.

If you are trying to lose weight it takes time eating healthy and working out for that to happen.

Don’t waste time or effort working out if weight loss is your goal.

Have you ever crunched the numbers of what you ACTUALLY cost your employer and what they ACTUALLY spend to keep their business afloat?

Yes, that was exactly my job—the books, receivables, payables, taxes, banking, HR, child support, health insurance, purchasing, unemployment, 401K, commissions, sourcing, vendor contracts, and so on. I was responsible for every penny.

The only employee who incurred a net cost to the company was myself, because I was front office/administration, and thus, not part of the production team that generated income and revenue.

minimum effort

Again, that’s your spin. Quiet quitting has nothing to do with minimum effort. You do exactly what you agreed to do, for an agreed-upon wage. No more, and no less. It is work to rule.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[philostam]

It just sounds like a lack of gratitude and poor work ethic to me! I don't feel taken advantage of. I could quit at any time and get a different job if I didn't like it. I enjoy my work and my company. I'm fine with if people want to actually quit their job and leave. And as long as people don't expect promotions or bonuses for only doing the bare minimum, I suppose if you get your job done then that's good, too. I have seen people using the term quiet quitting to justify sub par work, basically doing what you can "get away" with. This victim mentality that we are like slaves to corporations is a pretty big insult to actual slavery. Slaves would often be killed when they tried to leave. They were beaten and physically abused.

If you can quit a job and find work somewhere else, no need to feel sorry for yourself. Do your job. If you don't feel like your job is worth the money you're getting paid that seems like it's actually your problem for having agreed to do the job.

This attitude is like if somebody is sitting closer to an object at the dinner table and I ask them, "can you please pass that?" It would be SO easy to just pass the food but instead somebody is like "that's not my problem, just reach further." Are you kidding me?? Asking somebody to do a good job is TOO BIG of an ask? You won't go above and beyond unless you get some special reward for it? Selfish behavior, entitled attitude. If a company is not rewarding you properly you leave. I've gotten promotions as a result of my conduct, it had benefitted me. Believe me if it didn't I would leave.

I think a lot of people don't understand that you can't do unskilled labor like be a coffee barista and expect to be paid $16 an hour for it. That's crazy. Anybody could be trained to do unskilled labor, that's the point. If you view putting in extra effort to stand out in a company as being taken advantage of, no wonder you are struggling financially. You have no motivation to do anything unless you're already getting the benefit of it. If you are trying to lose weight it takes time eating healthy and working out for that to happen. You can't just show up to a job and expect to get paid handsomely for that - what makes you worth being paid more than others on your team? The company only makes so much money and if they have to invest $50,000 per employee on unskilled labor, that's going to make it hard for them to be profitable. Think about the money they have to pay for short term disability per employee, 401k, health insurance. Have you ever crunched the numbers of what you ACTUALLY cost your employer and what they ACTUALLY spend to keep their business afloat?

God forbid you have to run your own company and provide all of these things, and then you get an employee who wants to only do the bare minimum. Perfect, we will pay you the bare minimum, win win! Then the employee who is deliberately putting in the bare minimum gripes about getting paid so little... We don't pay extra money for a coffee drink that's shitty so the coffee drink will "improve". Somebody has to have a finished product that is worth more money before labor is going to be rewarded for it. That's why you go the extra mile... To demonstrate you are capable of performing labor that is worth more. If you don't get paid more, you leave, not whine about it and put in the minimum effort. That is such a passive, regressive way to live life.

I agree with a lot of what you say.

Yes, employees can quit but employers can also fire. So if they're not satisfied with the "sub-par" job of the employee, they can fire him. If someone stays in the job doing sub-par job for years, then by definition both parties have to be OK with it.

So it's not something that makes me angry, It is what it is.

 

[slant]

I agree with a lot of what you say.

Yes, employees can quit but employers can also fire. So if they're not satisfied with the "sub-par" job of the employee, they can fire him. If someone stays in the job doing sub-par job for years, then by definition both parties have to be OK with it.

So it's not something that makes me angry, It is what it is.

That's true, I just hate whiners, which is ironic because I'm whining about whiners so I guess it's even

 

[slant]

I

I’m not sure why you keep wanting to turn a simple business agreement into a moral test, or opportunity to judge others as lacking.

Employer offers job, jobseeker agrees to terms, employee does what they were hired to do, employee gets paid, rinse, lather, repeat.

There’s no other consideration here.





I’m not sure why you keep introducing this. The employee does exactly what they were hired to do, to the satisfaction of the employer, and the employee is paid for that work.

If and when the employer demands additional work and/or time that is not part of the original agreement, and offers no commensurate increase in compensation, and the employee refuses, but continues to do the job they were hired for, and are paid for, that is the pejorative “quiet quitting.”

Quiet quitting has nothing to do with bare minimums, or poor quality work.



No special reward is required.

If an employer wants above and beyond, they need to be willing to pay for it if they reasonably expect to get above and beyond.

The exchange is: labor ↔ wages.





Your judgmental position has been made so very clearly.

Expecting to be fairly paid in exchange for one’s labor is neither selfish, nor entitled.



No such thing. Propaganda term.



If they need to be trained to do it, it is, by definition, skilled labor.



Don’t waste time or effort working out if weight loss is your goal.



Yes, that was exactly my job—the books, receivables, payables, taxes, banking, HR, child support, health insurance, purchasing, unemployment, 401K, commissions, sourcing, vendor contracts, and so on. I was responsible for every penny.

The only employee who incurred a net cost to the company was myself, because I was front office/administration, and thus, not part of the production team that generated income and revenue.



Again, that’s your spin. Quiet quitting has nothing to do with minimum effort. You do exactly what you agreed to do, for an agreed-upon wage. No more, and no less. It is work to rule.

Cheers,
Ian

I appreciate your perspective but I think that we simply see things differently

 

[slant]

I guess that is what this thread boils down to...

"How annoying that others have a different life philosophy than me! How frustrating!" It isn't a fair open discussion, I suppose because I feel like the other opinion is the dominant opinion and I'm not feeling heard or understood.

I understand that my definition of quiet quitting is not what most people on this thread mean. I'm ok with the definition most of you use. When I'm talking about it, as I've said before, I have a certain slacker mentality in mind because that's how I've been it seen applied in my day to day life.

Of course if people only do their job that's not a real issue. It was a great point to bring up the perspective of the employer because employers can always fire underperforming employees. The system is pretty good at ironing these things out.

I suspect my underlying passion on this issue is that I perceive some workers at my job as having 'given up' and they repeatedly make mistakes but due to my company not being cost enough money by these mistakes the employees stays. They make way less money than I do so it's really no skin off my back it's just annoying to work with people who don't like or care about their job.

But that's life, right? There is always going to be a wide variety of people and attitudes they have towards work and their job. I can have mine and my preferences but just statistically speaking I'm going to have to work with people who I don't really appreciate their mindset.

I do think for me, it's a moral issue, and I understand that seems to upset people but I would push back and say those who are doing the quiet quitting have moral convictions behind their decision, too.

The clash between these mindsets has been going on forever and I do appreciate the labor movement in terms of taking children out of the work force, 8 hour days, overtime pay, and all the other great benefits we have. I recognize that though the mindset doesn't resonate with me, we do need people to push against the standard set by employers to get better work conditions.

Perhaps too, the way I was raised, I deal with tough times with getting tougher and adapting to my circumstances. Trying to get people to change never worked in my life, so I changed myself. And that's what these people are doing in a way ... It just seems sad, it seems like giving up. But that's only the way I view it, it seems these people are happy with their decisions.

 

[Wyote]

It was a great point to bring up the perspective of the employer because employers can always fire underperforming employees. The system is pretty good at ironing these things out.

Employers are just people, too.
Retention can make or break a lot of companies.

 

[slant]

Employers are just people, too.
Retention can make or break a lot of companies.

I think this was the core of my argument. I feel like when we get into workers rights, too often the worker only looks at things from their own perspective, which is completely natural but it often leads to unrealistic expectations on the employer. I suppose it's just my opinion but I think it's much harder to actually run a company than it is to be a clock in clock out worker who doesn't have to directly respond to stock holders. Business is delicate and until somebody has had to have the responsibility of being in charge, it is too easy to have your hand out asking for more and assuming it's easy to just give everyone more. At the same time if somebody has only ever been in charge and running a business they might have wrong assumptions about the workers. It goes both ways and maybe I'm harping more from the employer perspective because it's not being defended, because there is little regard for it in a lot of the responses.

 

[Wyote]

It goes both ways and maybe I'm harping more from the employer perspective because it's not being defended, because there is little regard for it in a lot of the responses.

It's fairly easy to argue for/against either side, which is what most people do.
Which keeps the problems of the system itself in place, generally.

 

[Jon32galham]

It just sounds like a lack of gratitude and poor work ethic to me! I don't feel taken advantage of. I could quit at any time and get a different job if I didn't like it. I enjoy my work and my company. I'm fine with if people want to actually quit their job and leave. And as long as people don't expect promotions or bonuses for only doing the bare minimum, I suppose if you get your job done then that's good, too. I have seen people using the term quiet quitting to justify sub par work, basically doing what you can "get away" with. This victim mentality that we are like slaves to corporations is a pretty big insult to actual slavery. Slaves would often be killed when they tried to leave. They were beaten and physically abused.

If you can quit a job and find work somewhere else, no need to feel sorry for yourself. Do your job. If you don't feel like your job is worth the money you're getting paid that seems like it's actually your problem for having agreed to do the job.

This attitude is like if somebody is sitting closer to an object at the dinner table and I ask them, "can you please pass that?" It would be SO easy to just pass the food but instead somebody is like "that's not my problem, just reach further." Are you kidding me?? Asking somebody to do a good job is TOO BIG of an ask? You won't go above and beyond unless you get some special reward for it? Selfish behavior, entitled attitude. If a company is not rewarding you properly you leave. I've gotten promotions as a result of my conduct, it had benefitted me. Believe me if it didn't I would leave.

I think a lot of people don't understand that you can't do unskilled labor like be a coffee barista and expect to be paid $16 an hour for it. That's crazy. Anybody could be trained to do unskilled labor, that's the point. If you view putting in extra effort to stand out in a company as being taken advantage of, no wonder you are struggling financially. You have no motivation to do anything unless you're already getting the benefit of it. If you are trying to lose weight it takes time eating healthy and working out for that to happen. You can't just show up to a job and expect to get paid handsomely for that - what makes you worth being paid more than others on your team? The company only makes so much money and if they have to invest $50,000 per employee on unskilled labor, that's going to make it hard for them to be profitable. Think about the money they have to pay for short term disability per employee, 401k, health insurance. Have you ever crunched the numbers of what you ACTUALLY cost your employer and what they ACTUALLY spend to keep their business afloat?

God forbid you have to run your own company and provide all of these things, and then you get an employee who wants to only do the bare minimum. Perfect, we will pay you the bare minimum, win win! Then the employee who is deliberately putting in the bare minimum gripes about getting paid so little... We don't pay extra money for a coffee drink that's shitty so the coffee drink will "improve". Somebody has to have a finished product that is worth more money before labor is going to be rewarded for it. That's why you go the extra mile... To demonstrate you are capable of performing labor that is worth more. If you don't get paid more, you leave, not whine about it and put in the minimum effort. That is such a passive, regressive way to live life.

I’d like to state your definition of “quiet quitti

It just sounds like a lack of gratitude and poor work ethic to me! I don't feel taken advantage of. I could quit at any time and get a different job if I didn't like it. I enjoy my work and my company. I'm fine with if people want to actually quit their job and leave. And as long as people don't expect promotions or bonuses for only doing the bare minimum, I suppose if you get your job done then that's good, too. I have seen people using the term quiet quitting to justify sub par work, basically doing what you can "get away" with. This victim mentality that we are like slaves to corporations is a pretty big insult to actual slavery. Slaves would often be killed when they tried to leave. They were beaten and physically abused.

If you can quit a job and find work somewhere else, no need to feel sorry for yourself. Do your job. If you don't feel like your job is worth the money you're getting paid that seems like it's actually your problem for having agreed to do the job.

This attitude is like if somebody is sitting closer to an object at the dinner table and I ask them, "can you please pass that?" It would be SO easy to just pass the food but instead somebody is like "that's not my problem, just reach further." Are you kidding me?? Asking somebody to do a good job is TOO BIG of an ask? You won't go above and beyond unless you get some special reward for it? Selfish behavior, entitled attitude. If a company is not rewarding you properly you leave. I've gotten promotions as a result of my conduct, it had benefitted me. Believe me if it didn't I would leave.

I think a lot of people don't understand that you can't do unskilled labor like be a coffee barista and expect to be paid $16 an hour for it. That's crazy. Anybody could be trained to do unskilled labor, that's the point. If you view putting in extra effort to stand out in a company as being taken advantage of, no wonder you are struggling financially. You have no motivation to do anything unless you're already getting the benefit of it. If you are trying to lose weight it takes time eating healthy and working out for that to happen. You can't just show up to a job and expect to get paid handsomely for that - what makes you worth being paid more than others on your team? The company only makes so much money and if they have to invest $50,000 per employee on unskilled labor, that's going to make it hard for them to be profitable. Think about the money they have to pay for short term disability per employee, 401k, health insurance. Have you ever crunched the numbers of what you ACTUALLY cost your employer and what they ACTUALLY spend to keep their business afloat?

God forbid you have to run your own company and provide all of these things, and then you get an employee who wants to only do the bare minimum. Perfect, we will pay you the bare minimum, win win! Then the employee who is deliberately putting in the bare minimum gripes about getting paid so little... We don't pay extra money for a coffee drink that's shitty so the coffee drink will "improve". Somebody has to have a finished product that is worth more money before labor is going to be rewarded for it. That's why you go the extra mile... To demonstrate you are capable of performing labor that is worth more. If you don't get paid more, you leave, not whine about it and put in the minimum effort. That is such a passive, regressive way to live life.

What you’re talking about isn’t quiet quitting. I don’t know where this “$16.00 an hr” barista came from but I’ll humor you. Does it matter that this person makes that much hourly?

Why do you believe you should restrict someone else’s income or what they believe they’re income should be. If they want more, they should get more. From what I’ve read thus far it seems you believe this barista is doing work that you don’t see fit for a livable wage.
Having the audacity to be receiving more income then you the person making $13.00 an hour going above and beyond your job duties. Maybe the issue isn’t with this imaginary $16.00 an hour barista but with your company.
They don’t respect you and you don’t respect your time and energy. But this $16.00 an hour barista is working for a corporation that respects they’re employees and is able to give them the wages they request. Good on them. Personally I would never want any of my employees to work “off the clock”. That’s insanity and I truly don’t believe you would do something so idiotic.

 

[John K]

"How annoying that others have a different life philosophy than me! How frustrating!" It isn't a fair open discussion, I suppose because I feel like the other opinion is the dominant opinion and I'm not feeling heard or understood.

I've only just now read through your thread, and my attitude is rather like yours in terms of my own work, as it was before I retired. I'm not working only for the money, though of course that's very important, but I'm working for the interest, for what I can give, for the sense of, and fulfilment of, self and team. In the kind of work I did, the money was a motivator only up to a basic sanitary level. Beyond that point it was far more to do with the content of the job. You can see extremes of this in the work some people take on - those who crave no-pay internships in glamorous organisations, or volunteer for the lifeboat service or the St John's Ambulance services, or go into local politics.

There isn't a hard dividing line between hard edged paid work, and these more voluntary kinds of occupation. Why do people take on unpaid work? Because they enjoy it, find it fulfilling, for the service they can provide others, to learn, to meet people and make contacts, to lay down experience for their future, etc. The work I did was definitely a paid occupation, but it also had quite captivating aspects that fascinated me. I often did more than was strictly required of me because I wanted to and in fact the roles were pretty open-ended some of the time. I didn't really think of this as being exploited by my company, but more along the lines that I just suggested motivate voluntary work.

The people we valued most in my company were the ones who weren't just serving their time, but enjoyed what they were doing, and formed into teams that were more than the sum of their parts. The ones who succeeded were given more in the sense of more interesting and challenging work and better opportunities in a virtuous circle. The ones who didn't tended to be side-lined, and anyone who just trod water out of temperament didn't just have problems with their supervisor but with the rest of their team too.

Now I'm talking about a work environment that was reasonably well paid, and where the work was varied and challenging. I suspect that even in jobs with far less scope for this there is often room for an employee to make life better for themselves by going the extra mile - not necessarily in pay, but in job satisfaction. So, on the whole I'm not in favour for myself of just doing what you are paid for because I'd find it tedious and boring, and I wouldn't feel any real connection with it or ownership of it. But this can't be a simple debate between two differing viewpoints, because there are widely different circumstances. If I have asked a photographic business to print me an A2 copy of one of my pictures, I just want the job done, and I'm not interested beyond getting my picture back at the agreed price and quality. I think some employment contracts are like that too. And again, if the guys I worked with were paid insufficient for the work they were doing, then they'd go with it for a while, but then performance would drop and grievance would rise. Interestingly, as I said, once the threshold of what was acceptable was reached, paying more didn't increase performance - it was more to do with the content of the work beyond that.

Do I think it's OK to just drift with the tide and still take home your pay? If you are working on (eg) a superstore checkout till, then yes, but if you are working as part of a team of people who all depend on each other then no.