Ask HN: Quiet quitting in FAANG doesn't work now?

23 points by dev_0 ↗ HN
Imagine working in FAANG now and competing with tons of smart leetcoders for projects now or you will be terminated

26 comments

[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 91.6 ms ] thread
Amazon had tons of quiet quitters. We probably could have coined the term.

1/4 to 1/3 of the engineering teams checked out during COVID. They operate in klo mode, keep the lights on.

Leetcoding doesn’t make you an effective hire. Plenty of leetcode geniuses who landed a job but can’t solve problems and either can’t do the work or just don’t want to.

Maybe 1/3rd are still active and faking it and last third are moving things forward.

I left last year, and it was a very political place. Management quality also regressed. One team I worked with were all former IBM employees who came to manage at Amazon. They quiet quit on Day 1.

(comment deleted)
Doesn’t everyone who quits at Amazon quit on Day 1?
“Leetcode doesn’t make you an effective hire” 1000% this. Requires so much more like a nose for impact and practical solutions given constraints.
Quiet quitting doesn't work in environments that put a certain kind/amount of pressure on people. It's not about FAANG vs non-FAANG.
How do you define "quiet quitting"?

Doing the absolute minimum required not to get fired?

Or not meeting unreasonable expectations? Working unpaid overtime, responding to emails outside working hours, etc.

Quiet quitting is a dumb term.

It's just doing your job. And of course it works anywhere.

Why is it called "quiet quitting"? It is a very confusing term.

It is not quitting, you are still doing your job and you still get paid (unless you are fired). Is it different from regular work-to-rule (if you do that as a form of protest) or just doing your job (if you simply don't take unreasonable, out-of-contract requests)?

cynical take: Because the people making up the term think it's outrageous employees would just do what they need to do and not more.
“Whoever frames the issue first, wins.” —-George Lakoff

“Quiet quitting” is a frame implicitly shaming workers for not providing more than the contracted work.

Similarly, “Quiet firing” could be a frame for employers paying employees the contractual amount without additional compensation for any effort above the contracted amount.

In these terms, employers have been “quiet firing” forever.

Note which frame is being repeated and by whom - as an indication of which frame and interests these outlets represent.

(I did not invent the “quiet firing” counter-frame, I just find it to be a great example of framing the issue)

“If you get your opponent to use your frame, no matter what they say, you still win” — also George Lakoff

I don't get how 'quiet quitting' carries any shaming connotations. At least in my mind it doesn't.
I think they are trying to frame it as quitting, as in "quitters vs winners", or giving up, etc.

It's a very BS term that tries to harass people into doing charity for the rich.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1652926/qui...

"Lockdown made Brits lazy and entitled, they will face a rude awakening CAROLE MALONE

There's a new craze sweeping the nation. It's called Quiet Quitting. It's a craze that started on TikTok, the same social media platform that encourages people who aren't disabled to pretend that they are in order to dodge airport queues. Nice, eh?"

> It's a craze that started on TikTok, the same social media platform that encourages people who aren't disabled to pretend that they are in order to dodge airport queues.

Some people said != platform encourages

lest we start describing what HN "encourages"

Appologies, I was simply quoting an award winning journalist at one of the major print media outlets from the UK and their well reasoned journalism on the subject to decipher if there were or were not negative connotations to the so called term "Quiet Quitting"
(comment deleted)
It's just a recoining of "Rest and vest" right?
As someone who has worked for two FAANGs so far, I can tell you that leetcode is a running joke that has almost zero correlation to actual skills.

Sure people practice a bit when they play the interview game, but being successful in FAANG is pretty much unrelated to solving leetcode problems.

Everyone is aware of this (including FAANG themselves), yet they keep doing it, like some ritual. I would say THAT is the running joke.
I'm currently revising to get through a FAANG interview.

So lot's of Leetcode etc.

Rust is my thing, so imagine struggling with the borrow checker during an interview.

It may not be the best way to choose if a developer is going to be good on the job (is there even a way).

But, I feel I'm a better programmer now than before.

Is this an "/s"? Leetcode is nothing but a pulse for hiring. Most jobs are about connecting systems together like Legos to unlock value for the business. The minority that actually require deep knowledge of DS/A require actual knowledge of DS/A, not just grinding a bunch of BST problems.
Nobody can tell. FAANG companies always had developers that were pushing out 3 tickets a quarter and developers pushing out 20 tickets a quarter. Some of that was due to mediocrity. Some of that was due to some projects being harder than others. Some of that was due to team structure problems. Nobody can really accurately evaluate this stuff and it was all just accepted.

The thing that has changed now is a lot more people are pushing out 3 tickets a month than before. But you can't necessarily point to who's slacking off and who's not.