Ms. Habel, a video on the Tiktok platform went viral this week.

There, a user named “Zaidleppelin” talks about “quiet quitting”, i.e. the temptation not to really quit, but not to go the extra mile at work and to define yourself through things other than work.

Why does this Tiktok video hit such a nerve?

Nadine Bos

Editor in business, responsible for "Career and Opportunity".

  • Follow I follow

Recently, we have often received feedback from clients that applicants are striving for a better work-life balance and that when choosing their employer they make less of the salary than free time and flexible working time models as decision criteria.

Above all, clients notice this with younger applicants.

They really say: "We value that."

When are we dealing with just a little more work-life balance and when with “quiet quitting”?

Literally translated that would be the "silent termination" ...

"Quiet Quitting" is not about resigning, but more about people saying: "I'm just doing work to rule now." I look: What kind of work do I owe and make sure that I don't do anything or don't do much more than that.

I would like to have less stress at work.

Working to rule can't be anything reprehensible in terms of employment law, right?

You are doing exactly what is required.

Yeah right.

But of course it's a tightrope walk.

Where is the line up to which the employee cannot be blamed?

When is it exceeded, and who becomes an underperforming employee who no longer performs as required?

How do you draw this line?

Case law says: Employees must always make full use of their personal capabilities.

The employer has a right of direction.

In other words, a right to issue instructions, to say: what work is actually owed?

If a boss believes that this is not being achieved, he must present evidence of this.

A benchmark is: Is the employee's work performance at least a third behind what comparable colleagues achieve?

The employer pays salary for adequate consideration.

But how much is a third less?

That's a really difficult question!

Exactly.

It is very difficult to say: Who is a comparable group?

Are they just those who carry out the same activities in the company, or do I have to look at the industry, for example?

Maybe I only have high performers in my company?

Then one is always at the bottom.

An example: Nine out of ten sales people make 10 million sales each year.

One makes "only" 4 million.

If you look at competitors, the 4 million is still a gigantic number.

Then you will not be able and willing to blame the employee.

I could also imagine professions where it is not so easy to put the work performance in figures.

Yes, this is the next difficulty!

How do I even measure work performance?

Last May there was a verdict on the subject at the Cologne Regional Labor Court, it was about a picker.

It was easy to measure the quantity he managed.

However, when it comes to the quality of work, it becomes more difficult for the employer to make a justified reproach to the employee.

In most cases, quality is actually the problem and not quantity.