- within Employment and HR topic(s)
- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Inhouse Counsel
- in Canada
- with readers working within the Accounting & Consultancy, Banking & Credit and Business & Consumer Services industries
There's been a lot of column inches dedicated to the idea of quiet quitting in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, whereby employees were reassessing their commitment to the workplace and slowly but quietly disengaging. Quiet cutting appears to be the employer's response to this. So what is quiet cutting?
Quiet cutting is when an employer engages in hidden tactics to encourage an employee to resign. It is an underhanded way of trimming back the number of staff without the need to engage in formal redundancy processes or performance management.
Examples of quiet cutting moves include denial of promotion opportunities, reducing career development, failing to deliver on promises, reassigning staff to different duties without formally changing their roles and similar behaviours. It's a phenomenon that made its appearance on the other side of the Atlantic first, where employment laws are less onerous in any event, and like many things American, it is surfacing more and more in the UK workplace.
Personnel Today calls it "shuffling the deck". It is subtly undermining someone's position so that they quit.
It's not nice, it's not open, it is not to be encouraged – but how would you prove it in an Employment Tribunal if you thought you were a victim because quiet cutting rarely leaves any overt evidence? You would have to persuade a tribunal that all of the things that have happened to you are deliberate and designed to force you to resign. And you would have to have resigned and be launching a claim of constructive dismissal to even get a claim off the ground, unless you could show there was a discriminatory reason for the cutting.
People Management draws attention to the fact that the practice of quiet cutting raises legal and ethical alarm bells. Of course, this is correct. How can it be contributing to fostering a pleasant workplace if this is the culture? This could have ramifications for recruitment and retention, too. Wise employers would do best to avoid it. Creating an intolerable environment so that someone has no option but to leave is hardly a good look for any company. You might get rid of a person who is no longer useful, but it does not signal to other staff that your organisation is a nice place to work.
We see a lot of this practice, especially around making workplaces intolerable for people with long-term health conditions and women with parenting responsibilities. We know it goes on.
Our advice to employees? If you think you are a victim of quiet cutting, you most probably are. But take legal advice and try to secure a negotiated exit before you pull the rip cord and constructively dismiss yourself. Negotiation is a far better option than litigation, especially when constructive dismissal is not an easy claim to win. Take advice before you take the leap.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
