Getty Images; Jenny Chang-Rodriguez/BI
- Bosses are quiet firing staff by making jobs unappealing through RTO mandates and harsh performance reviews.
- Instead of conducting major layoffs, some bosses are resorting to discreet tactics to cut head count.
- Experts say it's because employers have more leverage now due to fewer job opportunities.
Some companies are finding more discreet ways to trim their workforce without carrying out dramatic layoffs as they attempt to cut costs during a period of economic uncertainty.
While firms like Google, Meta, and Salesforce have laid off thousands of workers at the expense of intense public criticism, they're also resorting to less obvious tactics to edge workers out quietly.
Technology firm Dell recently ordered hybrid employees to return to the office three days a week regardless of where they live. Workers who choose to be fully remote will face limited career progression, an anonymous source told The Register.
After laying off 10,000 employees in late 2022, Meta introduced more stringent performance reviews, including two yearly performance reviews with managers directed to put more employees into low-performing categories. Low performers also received less bonus pay.
In November, Amazon decided that employees may have their promotions blocked if they do not comply with its three-day-a-week RTO mandate.
These tactics are more commonly known as "quiet firing" or "quiet cutting," — a workplace trend that has taken off after the end of the zero interest rate era. It's a subtle move by bosses to make a role less appealing, motivating workers to quit rather than forcing them out through layoffs.
Some of the ways bosses are making jobs less attractive to employees include putting restrictions on where they can work, strict RTO mandates, cutting workplace perks and benefits, giving harsher performance reviews, and limiting opportunities for career progression.
Ben Hardy, clinical professor of organizational behavior at London Business School, told Business Insider that although quiet firing may seem like a new workplace phenomenon, companies have always used such tactics to get rid of people.
Hardy said that 20 years ago, some big, well-known companies would have "car park conversations" with employees to lay out their options during periods of cuts.
"What would happen is your line manager would say, 'Can we just have a bit of a chat in the car park?' Basically, the conversation was, 'You can either take redundancy and quietly go, or we can go through a performance review, and it'll be miserable and grim. Which do you prefer?'"
A lot of companies sell the rhetoric of "we are family" to employees, and public layoffs cut against that perception, Hardy said. Quiet firing is a way to maintain control over their image.
Part of the reason bosses can employ these tactics is that the power is no longer in the hands of workers, and "the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction," says Dan Schawbel, a future work expert and managing partner of Workplace Intelligence.
After the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an influx of job opportunities, leading to the rise of trends like the Great Resignation, which saw workers readily quit their jobs in search of better opportunities.
But when the labor market tightened and the economy became more uncertain, the Great Resignation gave way to the "Big Stay," which saw job-hopping slow.
Public layoffs invite greater scrutiny
Public layoffs damage a company's reputation because of media attention, as well as the risk of disgruntled employees speaking out about their negative experiences on social media.
"Publicizing layoffs can lead to public scrutiny, which may damage the company's image and impact customer loyalty," Schawbel said.
"It can signal to investors that the company is not doing well. It could signal to job seekers and top talent that it might not be a company that you should apply for because they're conducting a layoff," he added.
Both Schawbel and Hardy agreed that the way companies trim workforces — either through quiet cutting methods or more public layoffs — depends on the kind of image they're trying to project.
Schawbel said that layoffs could signal to stockholders and shareholders that there's mismanagement at the company and throw into doubt how the company will perform in the future. In the case of publicly traded companies, they could show the stock market that they've got a grip on costs and are focused on profit-making, Hardy said.
Layoffs also invite more legal issues like discrimination claims, and possible wrongful termination lawsuits, which can add to a company's problems.
"That's more things for a company to handle, and if it's a publicized layoff, there could be even more risk," Schawbel said.
Ultimately, quiet firing and quiet cutting help employers maintain greater control over the narrative and how they're perceived publicly, Schawbel added.