Beyond the bare minimum – or just below it?

Beyond the bare minimum – or just below it?

The phenomenon of ‘quiet quitting’ has become one of the most hotly debated issues in employment law and workplace development in recent years. The term does not refer to the actual termination of an employment relationship, but describes employee behaviour where the worker confines themselves to meeting the minimum requirements set out in their job description and consciously refrains from making any further, ‘extra’ effort. From a legal perspective, this is particularly interesting, as the phenomenon operates in the grey areas of the employment relationship: it does not constitute a breach of contract, yet it has an impact on the employer’s operations.

The legal assessment of quiet quitting

Hungarian labour law defines the fundamental obligations of the employee. Such obligations include, for example, the duty to perform work, compliance with the employer’s instructions, and the duty to cooperate. Within this framework, ‘quiet quitting’ is generally not considered unlawful, provided that the employee carries out the tasks falling within their job description, adheres to working hours and work discipline, and does not breach the duty to cooperate.

The problem arises when there is a ‘cultural’ or informal discrepancy between the employer’s expectations and the performance actually delivered by the employee. In many organisations, a practice has developed whereby employees tacitly perform additional work, such as working overtime or taking on extra tasks. However, refusing to do so cannot in itself be regarded as a breach of contract. It is important to emphasise that the employer cannot lawfully penalise the employee simply because they do not carry out additional tasks not specified in the contract. At the same time, if the employee’s conduct amounts to a breach of the duty to cooperate – for example, by deliberately obstructing work processes or showing passive resistance – this may provide grounds for the employer to take action.

The reasons behind the phenomenon

Quiet quitting is not merely a legal issue, but also an organisational and psychological one. Among the most common triggers are burnout, inadequate managerial communication, or an imbalance between work and private life.<br><br>Understanding these factors is crucial, as the phenomenon is best addressed not primarily through legal means, but through HR and managerial solutions.

What can I legally do as an employer?

Right to issue instructions
Under the Labour Code, the employer has the right to issue instructions, which may extend to defining tasks within the framework of the employment contract or or requiring the performance of reasonable overtime; an unjustified refusal to comply with such lawful instructions may constitute a breach of duty, which may entail appropriate sanctions under labour law, and is therefore also key to assessing the phenomenon of quiet quitting.

Defining clear expectations
One of the employer’s most important tools is a clear job description and performance expectations. If it is clearly set out what falls within the employee’s duties, the uncertainty between the ‘minimum’ and the ‘expected extra’ can be reduced.

Implementation of a performance evaluation system
Objective performance evaluations help ensure that employers do not judge an employee’s attitude based on subjective impressions. If the employee meets the KPIs (key performance indicators), it is difficult to justify any negative consequences.

Communication and feedback
Quiet quitting often results from communication gaps. Regular feedback, one-on-one conversations, and an open organizational culture provide opportunities for issues to come to light sooner rather than later.

Redesigning motivational tools
Employers would do well to review their remuneration and recognition systems. Non-monetary incentives – such as flexible working arrangements, development opportunities or measures supporting work-life balance – can be particularly effective.

Use of legal measures – only where justified
If an employee’s conduct goes beyond the scope of ‘quiet quitting’ – for example, where a decline in performance or a breach of duty is observed – the employer may issue a warning, implement performance improvement measures, or, as a last resort, terminate the employment contract.

However, these steps must always be proportionate and supported by documented evidence.

Summary

Quiet quitting is a phenomenon that is difficult to define in legal terms, as in many cases the employee formally fulfils their obligations. As an employer, it is therefore important not to immediately seek out the possibility of labour law sanctions, but rather to try to address the situation using other means. Instead of imposing sanctions, it is definitely worth focusing on prevention and the development of organizational culture—provided, of course, that the employee’s conduct does not cross the line into a breach of duty. Clear expectations, fair treatment, and appropriate management practices can collectively reduce the incidence of this phenomenon and increase employee commitment in the long term. As an employer, however, it is important to know the extent of our power to issue instructions and what sanctions we can apply if an employee refuses to follow an instruction without good reason.