EDITORIAL
Quiet Quitting
Anna Scheyett
O ver the past few months, I have heard
more and more in the media about quiet
quitting. Headlines in the news include
questions such as “What Is ‘Quiet Quitting’? and
Why It’s Trending on Social Media” (Bretous,
2022), “Is Quiet Quitting Real?” (Harter, 2022),
and “What Is ‘Quiet Quitting’ and How It May Be
a Misnomer for Setting Boundaries at Work” (Kil-
patrick, 2022).
WHAT IS QUIET QUITTING?
While definitions vary, they all agree that in quiet
quitting, one does not literally quit one’s job, but
rather simply does the work that is expected of the
position, without going above and beyond what is
expected (Pearce, 2022). This phenomenon, first
noted on TikTok, has become widespread. A re-
cent Gallup poll found that quiet quitters made up
over one half of U.S. employees in the second
quarter of 2022 (Harter, 2022).
Why Are We Hearing about It Now?
During the pandemic, some employees saw how
their work might be reimagined remotely or flexi-
bly, while at the same time experiencing virtual
burnout and blurring of work–home boundaries.
Other employees, including many social workers,
were labeled “essential workers,” and had huge
and often dangerous in-person work demands
placed on them. Postpandemic demands to return
to work, coupled with work culture that provided
little reward or opportunity for growth, resulted in
disillusionment and disengagement for many
workers. This led to the Great Resignation, where
many who could afford to leave their jobs did so.
For those who could not, or chose not to leave
their jobs, quiet quitting was an alternative
(Espada, 2022).
https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swac051 C 2022 National Association of Social Workers
V 5
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/68/1/5/6835787 by University of Bahrain user on 03 November 2023
What Is the Debate about It?
There seem to be two streams in the debate about
quiet quitting. In one, this phenomenon is framed
as simply setting good work–life boundaries and
not getting caught up in the hustle culture; doing
one’s job well but not taking on additional uncom-
pensated work or service to get ahead (Kilpatrick,
2022). Quiet quitting is seen as a healthy response
to a culture of overwork that valorizes always do-
ing more (see Bunting, 2005). In another view, it
means being disengaged from one’s work, doing
the minimum to get by, and having a safer way to
express dissatisfaction or exact some small revenge
against employers who seem not to care or provide
opportunities for worker reward or development.
Quiet quitting precludes caring, passion, or energy
at work, and workers who quiet quit are not true
contributors to the workplace (Klotz & Bolino,
2022).
IS QUIET QUITTING HAPPENING IN SOCIAL
WORK?
While I have anecdotally heard of social workers
who have self-identified as quiet quitters, I could
not find anything on the internet or in the litera-
ture specific to quiet quitting in our discipline.
There are studies suggesting that social workers left
their positions in high numbers during the pan-
demic, as part of the Great Resignation. For exam-
ple, the statewide social worker vacancy in Idaho
increased from 19 percent in 2020 to 36 percent in
2021, and about 600 social workers in Kentucky
quit their jobs during the same time period. Many
of these social workers are finding new work
within the field at other agencies or in private prac-
tice or telehealth, but the churn in social work
positions has been high (Laurio, 2022). One could
imagine quiet quitting occurring as well.
WHAT ARE THE ETHICAL ISSUES IN QUIET
QUITTING IN SOCIAL WORK?
Considering the ethical implications of quiet quit-
ting in social work is important for our discipline,
given that this national trend seems to have no end
in sight. Although I do not have any answers, it is
still worthwhile to share my thoughts here as a way
to begin the conversation, and I hope you will join
in it as well.
Quiet Quitting May Violate Ethical
Principles
One of the ethical principles of our profession is
service, and our Code of Ethics states, “Social work-
ers elevate service to others above self-interest”
(National Association of Social Workers [NASW],
2021, Ethical Principles section, para. 4). Quiet
quitting seems in conflict with this principle. Find-
ing work–life balance requires balancing self-
interest and service rather than elevating service
above self-interest. Another social work principle
is competence, and our code states, “Social work-
ers continually strive to increase their professional
knowledge and skills and to apply them in practice”
(NASW, 2021, Ethical Principles section, para. 16).
Doing one’s job and no more precludes continual
striving for new skills and growing in competence.
In addition, competent social workers are proactive
critical thinkers and changemakers (Adams et al.,
2002), something unlikely if one is simply doing the
minimum expected of the job. Finally, the principle
of integrity may be challenged by quiet quitting.
The Code of Ethics requires that we “act honestly and
responsibly” and interact with our clients in a trust-
worthy manner (NASW, 2021). Might a social
worker who is quiet quitting and not doing all they
can for a client be violating an implicit pact with that
client?
Quiet Quitting May Be Supported by
Ethical Principles
The principle of integrity may also be upheld by
quiet quitting. Our code states that “social workers
should take measures to care for themselves profes-
sionally and personally” (NASW, 2021, Ethical
Principles section, para. 16). Self-care and setting
work–life boundaries are an ethical mandate,
which may, for some people, look like a version of
quiet quitting.
Perhaps the most important ethical principle
supported by quiet quitting may be social justice,
6 Social Work VOLUME 68, NUMBER 1 JANUARY 2023
which includes the following element: “Social
workers strive to ensure access to needed informa-
tion, services, and resources” (NASW, 2021, Ethical
Principles section, para. 7). We know that most so-
cial work services are built into systems that are un-
derstaffed and underresourced. Social workers are
often expected to work longer and harder to make
up for these deficits for the good of the client, thus
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/68/1/5/6835787 by University of Bahrain user on 03 November 2023
putting the onus on themselves to solve a problem
that is actually systemic. As noted by Astvik et al.
(2014), “When resources do not match the organi-
sational goals or quality standards, the social workers
are forced into strategies that either endanger their
own health or threaten the quality of service” (p.
52). This workload intensification and overwork
both take a huge toll on the social worker and prop
up an underresourced and lean system—allowing
the oppressive system to continue to function
(O’Neill, 2015).
Quiet quitting can lead to this exploitative over-
work being revealed, and in turn, put to an end.
Quiet quitting shines a light on the exploitation of
social workers’ labor by systems that manipulate
and count on their caring and dedication. Quiet
quitting can be protest, rejecting the neoliberal as-
sumption of responsibility at the individual level of
the social worker and instead demanding change at
a systemic level (Hendrix et al., 2021).
Balancing these principles and making decisions
about quiet quitting, self-care, burnout, and pro-
fessional commitment is truly challenging—a con-
flict between subordination of self for service to
others and self-care (Weinberg, 2014).
What are you seeing and what do you think
about quiet quitting? SW
REFERENCES
Adams, R., Dominelli, L., & Payne, M. (Eds.). (2002).
Critical practice in social work. Palgrave.
Astvik, W., Melin, M., & Allvin, M. (2014). Survival strat-
egies in social work: A study of how coping strategies
affect service quality, professionalism, and employee
health. Nordic Social Work Research, 4, 52–66. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2013.801879
Bretous, M. (2022, October 14). What is “quiet quitting”?
And why it’s trending on social media. HubSpot. https://
blog.hubspot.com/marketing/quiet-quitting
Bunting, M. (2005). Willing slaves: How the overwork culture
is ruling our lives. HarperCollins.
Espada, M. (2022, August 23). Employees say ‘quiet
quitting’ is just setting boundaries: Companies fear
long-term effects. Time. https://time.com/6208115/
quiet-quitting-companies-response/
Harter, J. (2022, September 6). Is quiet quitting real? Gallup.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/398306/quiet-
quitting-real.aspx
Hendrix, E., Barusch, A., & Gringeri, C. (2021). Eats me
alive!: Social workers reflect on practice in neoliberal
contexts. Social Work Education, 40, 161–173. https://
doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2020.1718635
Kilpatrick, A. (2022, August 20). What is “quiet quitting”
and how it may be a misnomer for setting boundaries at
work. KQED. https://www.kqed.org/news/
11923100/what-is-quiet-quitting-and-how-it-may-
be-a-misnomer-for-setting-boundaries-at-work
Klotz, A., & Bolino, M. (2022, September 15). When quiet
quitting is worse that the real thing. Harvard Business

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/68/1/5/6835787 by University of Bahrain user on 03 November 2023

Review. https://hbr.org/2022/09/when-quiet-quit
ting-is-worse-than-the-real-thing
Laurio, A. (2022, April–May). The Great Resignation: So-
cial workers seek better work experiences, but most
stay within profession. Social Work Advocates. https://
www.socialworkers.org/News/Social-Work-Advo
cates/April-May-2022/The-Great-Resignation
National Association of Social Workers. (2021). Code of
ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Au-
thor.
O’Neill, L. (2015). Regulating hospital social workers and
nurses: Propping up an “efficient” lean health care
system. Studies in Political Economy, 95, 115–136.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19187033.2015.11674948
Pearce, K. (2022, September 12). What is “quiet quitting”?
Hub. https://hub.jhu.edu/2022/09/12/what-is-
quiet-quitting/
Weinberg, M. (2014). The ideological dilemma of subordi-
nation of self versus self-care: Identity construction of
the ‘ethical social worker.’ Discourse & Society, 25,
84–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513508855

Anna Scheyett, PhD, MSW, is professor, School of Social

Work and College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences,
University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA; email:
amscheye@uga.edu.
Advance Access Publication November 21, 2022

SCHEYETT / Quiet Quitting 7