From a very young age, most of us were conditioned to believe that working hard is the only way to achieve success. We’re supposed to trust that our efforts will be rewarded someday, even if we don’t see a single sign of that happening any time soon…
Eventually, however, most adults realize that going above and beyond may never pay off; it might simply be a waste of time and energy. Workers on Reddit have been discussing why there’s absolutely nothing wrong with doing the “bare minimum” while on the clock, so we’ve gathered some of their most honest replies below. Enjoy reading through them, and be sure to upvote the ones that you wholeheartedly agree with!
This post may include affiliate links.
#21
I mean, doing the minimum is kind of the point of a Union contract.
It's up to the company to negotiate with the union what the new 'minimum' will be each year and what benefits/concessions they are willing to apply to get the new initiatives approved.
Doing the minimum is necessary leverage to ensure standardized and fair treatment across the work force.
It's up to the company to negotiate with the union what the new 'minimum' will be each year and what benefits/concessions they are willing to apply to get the new initiatives approved.
Doing the minimum is necessary leverage to ensure standardized and fair treatment across the work force.
6points
#22
Coming from someone in HR, quiet quitting is such a bs concept. It's capitalistic propaganda that favors employers taking advantage of their employees without providing sufficient compensation.
Doing the "bare minimum" is still doing exactly what you were hired for, and that should be sufficient. You were hired to do x job duties at y salary. Just because you aren't willing to do x and z at the same y salary does not make you a bad employee. You shouldn't have to go "above and beyond" to be a good employee. Employers aren't owed any amount of what is essentially unpaid extra labor by their employees.
Doing the "bare minimum" is still doing exactly what you were hired for, and that should be sufficient. You were hired to do x job duties at y salary. Just because you aren't willing to do x and z at the same y salary does not make you a bad employee. You shouldn't have to go "above and beyond" to be a good employee. Employers aren't owed any amount of what is essentially unpaid extra labor by their employees.
Report
6points
#23
I’m a manager in an IT dept
I laugh every time i hear about this. I pay employees to do the bare minimum. That’s what we agreed upon when i hired them. If they do the bare minimum I’m completely happy.
People who “do more”, at least in a career setting, do so to improve themselves and push themselves to be better. They want to eventually solve harder problems, take on more responsibility, make more money, etc.
You strive for excellence for yourself, not for your boss or the company.
I laugh every time i hear about this. I pay employees to do the bare minimum. That’s what we agreed upon when i hired them. If they do the bare minimum I’m completely happy.
People who “do more”, at least in a career setting, do so to improve themselves and push themselves to be better. They want to eventually solve harder problems, take on more responsibility, make more money, etc.
You strive for excellence for yourself, not for your boss or the company.
6points
#24
And what do you mean by “bare minimum”? If I’m at a place that thinks you gotta be working 50-60 hours a week every week just to be considered a “good” employee then to hell with that. All these places think the tank and file need to be as motivated as the owner who’s taking in all the profits. I’m only on this earth for a little while, you think I wanna spend my time bootlicking?
6points
#25
Cheap.
Fast.
Good.
You get to pick *two*, employers.
Fast.
Good.
You get to pick *two*, employers.
5points
#26
If I were an employer, I’d expect my employee to finish the job as expected. I wouldn’t give a darn how it happens as long as it happens.
That said, I’m an employee and follow this philosophy. I do my work but I’m not bending over backwards for you.
That said, I’m an employee and follow this philosophy. I do my work but I’m not bending over backwards for you.
Report
5points
#27
Quiet quitting sounds like an employee setting boundaries. I’ve been quiet promoted twice at work and then quiet fired and now I’m just straight up quiet quitting. Don’t appreciate me busting my bum and all my hard work? Ok then no worries. I’ll just keep to myself then.
4points
#28
If an employer pays the bare minimum they can get away with, I'm going to do the bare minimum I can get away with. What is my incentive to perform well if I'm not being offered fair compensation? What is the employer's incentive to pay me better if I'm going to put in the same effort for a lower wage?
4points
#30
I think it depends on compensation. If you are taken care of, paid well, have good management, have good benefits, then you are compensated well to go that extra mile. Work to wage essentially. If you get bit fullfilment, no benefits and the pay is minimum then you work to that. The one caveat, If it’s entry level and you have a clear path to move up and be compensated well, you might really want to show you should be promoted.
Report
4points
#31
There’s a way to do it without effecting coworkers and there’s a way to do it absolutely effecting coworkers.
Finding that fine balance is the key to antiwork.
Finding that fine balance is the key to antiwork.
3points
#32
Forming opinions about this is above my pay grade.
3points
#33
You wanna work for the wage you WANT. not the wage you get. Move your way up. If you do the bare minimum you’ll always make minimum wage.
-2points