.webp?width=1200&height=800&name=quiet-firing%20(1).webp)
By now, you’ve likely heard about the buzz surrounding “quiet quitting,” but have you heard of “quiet firing”? As a (mis)management tactic, quiet firing may not be new, but it’s certainly being looked at across upper management circles with new eyes.
In this article, we’ll discuss what quiet firing is, the answer to the question “Is quiet firing illegal,” and most importantly, the quiet firing signs to look out for (and put an end to) among your managerial staff.
RELATED: Set-Up-to-Fail Syndrome - The Manager's Role >>
To fully understand the concept of quiet firing, we must discuss the cultural phenomenon that was—and is—quiet quitting.
From late 2022 to early 2023, interest in “quiet quitting” spiked on search engines from virtually zero searches to nearly half of a million searches per month. In other words, the concept of quiet quitting was a super trend in the history of employer-employee relationships.
But what was even more impactful was the data that proved quiet quitting wasn’t just a buzzword; rather, it had real teeth and tangible consequences on the global economy. In late February of 2024, McKinsey & Co. published its think piece, supported by hard research, on “The hidden costs of quiet quitting, quantified.”
McKinsey analysts figured that in a typical organization, around half of employees are disengaged, and around 10% could be classified as “quiet quitters.” They estimated that, in consideration of the effects of quiet quitting (such as low productivity and attendance, contagious dissatisfaction, low innovation, and poor well-being), the cost of quiet quitting added up to “around 4% of the wage bill for an average large corporation.”
While extensive research hasn’t been conducted on the impacts of quiet quitting on smaller companies specifically, one could assume that in an organization where every hire and every wage dollar counts, the impacts of quiet quitting could be even more severe.
In the context of quiet quitting, the concept of quiet firing exists. Where quiet quitting may feel to an employee like an act of obstinance or an assertion of autonomy over an employer, the (mis)management tactic of quiet firing turns the tables on the employer-employee relationship dynamic—while retaining all of quiet quitting’s toxicity.
Quiet firing, in short, can be defined as a manager’s continued decision to make an employee’s experience purposely intolerable or to set an employee up to fail. While the specifics, signs, and symptoms of quiet firing differ across industries, organizations, managers, and roles, the end goal of quiet firing remains the same: to force the employee’s hand so that they must quit the position themselves, instead of being let go by their employer.
While “quiet firing” might be a newly coined phrase, it’s hardly a new concept. In the 1999 comedy Office Space, director Mike Judge paints a world in which a prototypically horrible manager, Bill Lumbergh (played by Gary Cole), deploys increasingly severe quiet firing tactics against his employee Milton (played by Stephen Root) for years. Eventually, Lumbergh stops sending Milton his paycheck and Milton sets the entire office ablaze.
While Office Space provides an extreme and darkly comedic take on the quiet firing concept, in the real world, many managers purposefully or passively use some similar quiet firing tactics to make a role unbearable or not worthwhile for an employee.
In a study published in the Harvard Business Review, researchers found that a “majority of workers who quit their jobs in 2021 did so because of low pay, a lack of growth opportunities, or feeling disrespected.”
RELATED: What is Live Quitting? Understanding the Latest Employee Exit Trend >>
As discussed, quiet firing shifts its shape depending on the manager, role, and job duties in question, among other factors.
But in general, a business owner or upper-level manager can watch out for the following signs of quiet firing among its workforce:
Quiet firing happens for a variety of reasons, and they depend entirely on the managers themselves. Quiet firing is never the appropriate route to take in the employer-employee relationship, whether you’d like to terminate the employee or not.
Quiet firing often creeps in when managers want to avoid some or several aspects of the termination process. They may want to avoid making a severance payout, skipping out on the costs associated with unemployment benefits, or harboring resentment toward an employee for personal reasons.
As a reminder, it’s never legal to take any adverse action against an employee (including any of the above-listed signs of quiet firing) for a discriminatory reason. Discriminatory reasons include but are not limited to, reasons related to an employee’s gender, race, national origin, sexual orientation or identity, religion, disability status, pregnancy status or age (if the employee is over 40).
RELATED: Recent Discrimination Cases in the Workplace: EEOC Enforcement Is Up >>
If a manager is seeking to force an employee to quit so the company doesn’t have to support er the requirements of the law or a contract executed between the employer and employee, their actions may also be illegal. In fact, those actions could form the grounds for a wrongful termination claim.
The legality of some of the most common signs of quiet firing differs heavily depending on the circumstances of the situation and the employer-employee relationship; however, no quiet firing tactic is ever advisable.
Quiet firing often isn’t a deliberate strategy—it’s the result of avoided conversations and unclear performance expectations. Over time, that avoidance can lead to inconsistent management practices, disengagement and increased turnover.
Addressing performance issues directly, with clear expectations and documentation, is not only more effective—it also reduces the risk of escalation and potential legal exposure.
RELATED: Wrongful Termination: What Employers Need to Know >>
Quiet firing itself is not a legal term, but the behaviors associated with it can be illegal if they involve discrimination, retaliation or violations of employment law. Actions that create a hostile or unfair work environment may expose employers to legal risk.
Managers may resort to quiet firing to avoid difficult conversations, formal performance management or termination processes. In some cases, it stems from a lack of training or discomfort with addressing employee issues directly.
Clear performance management processes, consistent feedback, manager training and strong HR oversight help prevent quiet firing behaviors. Addressing issues early reduces the likelihood of passive or harmful management tactics.
Employers should investigate concerns, document behaviors and ensure managers follow appropriate performance management practices. Involving HR early can help resolve the issue before it escalates.
Quiet firing can damage trust, increase turnover and create a negative work environment. Employees who feel unsupported or targeted are more likely to disengage or leave the organization.
Quiet quitting, quiet firing and other inappropriate workplace practices can change the trajectory of a successful company. Whether you suspect these toxic tactics could be at play at your organization, or you’d just like to get ahead of them in case they do, Axcet HR is here to help you get a handle on your workplace culture.
Our management training experts help build better leaders at your small business while guarding against liability.
Our HR compliance and workplace culture experts are ready to work with you to understand (and potentially adjust) your employment practices. To learn more, schedule a free consultation today.
Written by
Jeanette Coleman, SPHR, SHRM-SCP, is the Director of Human Resources at Axcet HR Solutions, where she has contributed her expertise for over 21 years.
As a leader in the HR industry, she holds advanced certifications as a Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) and SHRM-Senior Certified Professional (SHRM-SCP). Jeanette oversees HR strategy and operations, ensuring Axcet delivers exceptional HR services that help small and mid-sized businesses stay compliant and grow.
With a Master’s degree in Human Resource Management from Keller Graduate School and a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from Kansas State University, Jeanette is well-equipped to lead and support clients in navigating complex HR challenges.
Throughout her 15-year tenure as Director of Human Resources, she has been instrumental in positioning Axcet as the Midwest’s largest and premier Professional Employer Organization (PEO). Her previous roles at Axcet include Director of Employee Benefits and Senior HR Consultant, where she gained extensive experience in HR outsourcing, payroll administration, and employee risk management.
Jeanette’s leadership reflects her deep commitment to helping businesses thrive through strategic, compliance-driven HR solutions. Through her writing, she shares insights on HR strategy, compliance, and best practices to help employers confidently manage their workforce.
.png){kind=logo}
Let us know what you think...