'Quiet firing' is legally, reputationally damaging, experts say

A recent survey by Zety found that nearly three-quarters of employees said they’ve experienced “quiet firing” tactics, such as increased workload without pay, micromanagement, and exclusion from projects. 

It also found that 70 per cent of the U.S. workers surveyed believe return-to-office (RTO) mandates are being used to intentionally push them to quit.  

Canadian employers may think they’re avoiding a costly severance process by quietly nudging an employee out of the workplace, but as Ian Gellatly, professor of management at the Alberta School of Business, explains, the tactic may be opening them up to legal and reputational risk. 

“It's a very passive way of dealing with your people problems. And, unfortunately, that approach, although it seems easy on one hand, it can be more damaging in the long run,” he says. 

“It sends messages to other people. If you're a member of a team and you're a good player, and you know the manager is doing this, targeting one of your team members, that sours the entire team. So when we talk about the impact on culture, I think it's quite real.” 

Quiet firing can equal constructive dismissal in Canada 

For employers north of the border, quiet firing can expose employers to legal risk, when employees sense they’re being pushed out and decide to lawyer up. In Canada, constructive dismissal occurs when an employer makes unilateral changes to a job that fundamentally alter its nature, leading the employee to resign; “They'll construct a situation that becomes intolerable for the employee,” says Gellatly. 

Employers can be especially vulnerable in scenarios where the perceived quiet firing is subtle, and this is where HR can be impacted when they are called upon to address claims.  

Gellatly stresses that quiet quitting should be on HR’s radar. 

“A charge comes through, then the company is having to scramble,” he says. 

“There's nothing formal in place. There was no documentation for any of this stuff. So then the company is exposed. I think HR would probably much prefer managers deal with things more directly.” 

Employment relationships are becoming more transactional 

Quiet firing, and its counterpart quiet quitting, signal an underlying erosion of employee-employer trust, says Gellatly, and a shift towards more transactional work relationships.  

This could in part be due to the shift to more prevalent digital and remote work. 

“We're on kind of a downward slide here, I think, where it's less about relationships and a lot more about transactional, economic … we're not really thinking about the person or employees,” Gellatly says, and it goes both ways, as employees likewise “don't think about the company as a benevolent, caring entity, but something rather [to be] exploited. It's just a very different feel.” 

Along with a general erosion of trust, Gellatly points to generational differences in the way work relationships are expected to play out – particularly when it comes to long-term commitment to an employer. 

“When I talk to my students about this, they look at me like, ‘You're crazy, old man. Why would anybody ever be committed to an organization?’” he jokes.  

“We don't think in terms of investing in employees showing commitment and loyalty to their organizations, employers showing loyalty and commitment to their employees through support.” 

Focus on relationship building 

Quiet firing often starts as an attempt to avoid direct confrontation, and as Williams points out, this is especially true for Canadians.  

“We are very nice. In Canada, it's hard to give constructive feedback very directly. We're not as good at that,” Williams says.  

“HR needs to make sure that managers can have the hard conversations where necessary, but then also invest in the supports. So rather than quietly, passively pushing someone out, it would be about identifying what is really going on here, some clear metrics for performance improvement, if that's what's needed, and maybe support to learn new skills that will help them be successful in their job.” 

Quiet firing affects recruitment 

Zety’s report found that 73 per cent of workers would avoid companies known for quiet firing. According to Gellatly, the consequences extend well beyond current employees. 

“People aren't quiet these days … once you start to damage your brand and your reputation, you're not an employer of choice, it is going to be harder to attract people,” he says, adding that even when hiring is successful, that damage can linger in the expectations of new hires. 

“When you get people that come into the organization, they're going to be very guarded, they're going to be looking for this, and so you're not going to get people to come in who are trusting and willing to give commitment. It's risky behaviour.” 

The Zety survey revealed that 53 per cent of employees would immediately start job hunting if they felt they were being quietly fired. To counteract this, Williams stresses that maintaining an atmosphere of “quality work” is a crucial goal for HR.  

This includes listening, being flexible, and providing opportunities for learning, which is emerging as a must-have for employees as tech skills continue to evolve and grow in importance.