We had “quiet quitting” and “loud quitting,” and now we have a new sound-based corporate term: “quiet cutting.” If you, as a business owner, wonder what it is and whether should you be afraid of it, don’t worry. Quiet cutting can be a really great thing. But first, what is it?
According to the Wall Street Journal, quiet cutting is when you notify employees that you are reassigning them rather than terminating them. The theory is that it’s cheaper to get someone to quit than to terminate someone and pay severance, so instead of laying someone off, you reassign them and hope they leave.
Now, while I don’t doubt that there are people out there who do just that, I’ve been behind the scenes on many lay-offs and position eliminations where we reassigned people.
Reassigning in the hopes that someone will quit is definitely a common practice at the executive level but below that? It’s not the practical reason for doing so.
To keep reading, click here: What ‘Quiet Cutting’ Really Is and What It Looks Like Behind the Scenes
Completely agree that purposefully making people unhappy at work is passive aggressive and childish. You’re right, be an adult and just terminate them so everyone can move on.
I have seen this happen with employees who have performance issues in their current position and react negatively to PIP that is suggested by HR, by claiming harassment and or going suddenly on an extended leave of absence using work-caused illness or using FLMA, to avoid dealing with the PIP. These employees know how to work the system to avoid being terminated for cause and refuse all retraining efforts. The only way to terminate is to have a running narrative on their job performance and constant review of their job performance skills, in order to terminate them correctly. The workplace is better off with them gone than continuing to have them active on the payroll.