Quiet quitting?

[Skeever]

And Skeever, you're right. I have biases. I admit it.

If you're at Work Level 1, let's call it, and you have no desire to get to Work Level 2, does that fall into Quiet Quitting? And if so, I have no issue with that. We need people in ALL roles, even in Work Level 1. But my expectation is that if you're in Work Level 1, then you're giving 100% in your role.

Does that make sense?

This is how I look at quiet quitting actually. Maybe people look at it in different ways but for me it's exactly that, being at level one and then not wanting to get to level two.

Also I think people go through phases where work is more or less of there life. When I was at level one I was working all the time to get to level two, now I would say I'm at level three and I am not even thinking about level four, I'm just thinking about how to do my job well and then make time in my life for other priorities. That's not to say it will always be that way, that's just how it is now for me.

[TAC]

And Skeever, you're right. I have biases. I admit it.

If you're at Work Level 1, let's call it, and you have no desire to get to Work Level 2, does that fall into Quiet Quitting? And if so, I have no issue with that. We need people in ALL roles, even in Work Level 1. But my expectation is that if you're in Work Level 1, then you're giving 100% in your role.

Does that make sense?

This is how I look at quiet quitting actually. Maybe people look at it in different ways but for me it's exactly that, being at level one and then not wanting to get to level two.

Also I think people go through phases where work is more or less of there life. When I was at level one I was working all the time to get to level two, now I would say I'm at level three and I am not even thinking about level four, I'm just thinking about how to do my job well and then make time in my life for other priorities. That's not to say it will always be that way, that's just how it is now for me.

When I was a manager, I made sure that everyone knew that every job in the store is important. Some people worked to become supervisors because that was important to them. Others wanted no part of it, but that didn't mean they weren't valued.

Quiet quitting is a dumb fucking term. It's just when I've seen it, and there's dumb tiktok videos and shit, it's usually being muttered by someone that seems to be crossing their arms and stomping their feet going "I'm not doing anything extra." It just comes off as so whiney. I'm sure that contributed to my bias against the term.

Not everyone is programmed to get ahead. That's fine. An organization needs everyone.

[Skeever]

That's where I met in the middle with Stadler too. Yes it's dumb.  Social media sucks.

[Implode]

I feel like there is this really inconvenient hump to get over when discussing things like this. Quiet Quitting, Cancel Culture, CRT, BLM, Me too, etc. etc. etc. All of these terms are just created buzzwords that have become shorthand for different things depending on which side of any discussion you're on. This level of obfuscation makes it hard to really discuss the specifics about what the disagreements are actually about.

Also quiet quitting can mean completely different things depending on the position. For example quiet quitting in a my web developer position probably looks wildly different than quiet quitting for someone working retail. Like for example, I'd imagine someone quiet quitting in my position would be putting in the bare minimum amount of effort to barely meet deadlines. They may even go so far as the over employed route to game the system that way. Someone in retail may see quiet quitting as simply refusing to answer the inevitable texts and calls on their days off asking for them to come in on short notice.

[Stadler]

I could go down a laundry list of reasons. But it’s usually a variation of young people getting jobs with an idealized version of how it will work and then finding out it won’t. Or being promised that something has a future when it may or may not. And then there’s just the expectation that “this is what you’re supposed to do”

After going through a smattering of throw away jobs, I finally landed myself in the trades (electrician) and while I’m thankful today that my knowledge of the industry has allowed me to be in the comfortable job I’m in today, I wouldn’t wish what I went through to get here on my worst enemy. One of my first bosses called all apprentices “poop-stain” and ALL construction bosses give the apprentices the crappiest work on the job site that no one wants to do. But it’s the culture of “paying your dues” and toughening you up that’s been around for decades.

It’s no wonder women very often don’t stick with the trades. They often sign up because they hear how much money you can make, and often walk away because of the abuse. And I personally think they are smart for leaving and men are dumb for staying…but here we are.

The abuse isn't because of the jobs, it's because of the managers.  The idea that because you can DO a task then you can MANAGE that task is both outdated and dangerous.  It's also not helped by the "Doers" belief that "you don't know what I do" and "I can do your [management] job better than you because I know how to sweep floors/write code/whatever", as if that's all that management is.   Bill Belichick cannot and never was able to chase down quarterbacks like Lawrence Taylor, but he did a bang-up job in managing him.   

"Management" is a skill independent of the skill being managed.   Remember that.

[Stadler]

I feel like there is this really inconvenient hump to get over when discussing things like this. Quiet Quitting, Cancel Culture, CRT, BLM, Me too, etc. etc. etc. All of these terms are just created buzzwords that have become shorthand for different things depending on which side of any discussion you're on. This level of obfuscation makes it hard to really discuss the specifics about what the disagreements are actually about.

Also quiet quitting can mean completely different things depending on the position. For example quiet quitting in a my web developer position probably looks wildly different than quiet quitting for someone working retail. Like for example, I'd imagine someone quiet quitting in my position would be putting in the bare minimum amount of effort to barely meet deadlines. They may even go so far as the over employed route to game the system that way. Someone in retail may see quiet quitting as simply refusing to answer the inevitable texts and calls on their days off asking for them to come in on short notice.

I think you and Skeever are spot on; most of the disagreement here is really about mis-applied nomenclature.  I have ZERO problem with people that have their job, give 100% FOR THAT JOB, draw boundaries and are perfectly fine with not advancing.  That to me is the perfect solution; establish your boundaries, accept the consequences for those boundaries, and put in your effort.  Can't ask for more than that, and in fact we NEED those people.   Eddie Van Halen can't be Eddie Van Halen without Michael Anthony or Alex Van Halen knowing their role in the organization.  Dave Murray in Iron Maiden is an even better example. Does his thing, to a high level, and lets Bruce and Steve do all the interviews and take the glory/abuse.  NO PROBLEM AT ALL.  Where I ran afoul of the definition is in all the nooks and crannies that the term seems to suggest.  There's nothing "quitting" about giving your best for the current job but having no desire to be VP. 

[XJDenton]

I could go down a laundry list of reasons. But it’s usually a variation of young people getting jobs with an idealized version of how it will work and then finding out it won’t. Or being promised that something has a future when it may or may not. And then there’s just the expectation that “this is what you’re supposed to do”

After going through a smattering of throw away jobs, I finally landed myself in the trades (electrician) and while I’m thankful today that my knowledge of the industry has allowed me to be in the comfortable job I’m in today, I wouldn’t wish what I went through to get here on my worst enemy. One of my first bosses called all apprentices “poop-stain” and ALL construction bosses give the apprentices the crappiest work on the job site that no one wants to do. But it’s the culture of “paying your dues” and toughening you up that’s been around for decades.

It’s no wonder women very often don’t stick with the trades. They often sign up because they hear how much money you can make, and often walk away because of the abuse. And I personally think they are smart for leaving and men are dumb for staying…but here we are.

The abuse isn't because of the jobs, it's because of the managers.  The idea that because you can DO a task then you can MANAGE that task is both outdated and dangerous.  It's also not helped by the "Doers" belief that "you don't know what I do" and "I can do your [management] job better than you because I know how to sweep floors/write code/whatever", as if that's all that management is.   Bill Belichick cannot and never was able to chase down quarterbacks like Lawrence Taylor, but he did a bang-up job in managing him.   

"Management" is a skill independent of the skill being managed.   Remember that.

The peter principle?

[jammindude]

I could go down a laundry list of reasons. But it’s usually a variation of young people getting jobs with an idealized version of how it will work and then finding out it won’t. Or being promised that something has a future when it may or may not. And then there’s just the expectation that “this is what you’re supposed to do”

After going through a smattering of throw away jobs, I finally landed myself in the trades (electrician) and while I’m thankful today that my knowledge of the industry has allowed me to be in the comfortable job I’m in today, I wouldn’t wish what I went through to get here on my worst enemy. One of my first bosses called all apprentices “poop-stain” and ALL construction bosses give the apprentices the crappiest work on the job site that no one wants to do. But it’s the culture of “paying your dues” and toughening you up that’s been around for decades.

It’s no wonder women very often don’t stick with the trades. They often sign up because they hear how much money you can make, and often walk away because of the abuse. And I personally think they are smart for leaving and men are dumb for staying…but here we are.

The abuse isn't because of the jobs, it's because of the managers.  The idea that because you can DO a task then you can MANAGE that task is both outdated and dangerous.  It's also not helped by the "Doers" belief that "you don't know what I do" and "I can do your [management] job better than you because I know how to sweep floors/write code/whatever", as if that's all that management is.   Bill Belichick cannot and never was able to chase down quarterbacks like Lawrence Taylor, but he did a bang-up job in managing him.   

"Management" is a skill independent of the skill being managed.   Remember that.

I agree, but I think we might be talking past each other here.

I’m trying to say that it’s not just a few managers, but an ENTIRE CULTURE of management across ALL trades in the construction industry.

Yes, you could pick out some rare exceptions that don’t do things that way, but the overwhelming culture of the industry is, “suck it up and get it done or I’ll find someone who will!”

There’s a very “drill sergeant/private” relationship between the old school and the new arrivals. And if you don’t fall into line, you’re out. So you take the hazing or go elsewhere.

[lordxizor]

Yes, you could pick out some rare exceptions that don’t do things that way, but the overwhelming culture of the industry is, “suck it up and get it done or I’ll find someone who will!”

There’s a very “drill sergeant/private” relationship between the old school and the new arrivals. And if you don’t fall into line, you’re out. So you take the hazing or go elsewhere.

I have literally never had manager like this. From my high school jobs, through my entry level engineering jobs, up to today where I am middle management. Maybe I've just been exceedingly lucky, but I think the majority of manager value their employees and want them to have work life balance. I would guess you see more managers like that when they're employing easily replaceable people in low pay jobs.

[jammindude]

I was specifically speaking of the construction trades. My bad if I didn’t make that clear.

[lordxizor]

I was specifically speaking of the construction trades. My bad if I didn’t make that clear.

The context was probably buried in the quotes which I didn't bother to reread.

[Stadler]

I was specifically speaking of the construction trades. My bad if I didn’t make that clear.

I've experienced that; I started in the heavy construction industry and it was like that.  But again, that's because of the managers.  I've lived that.  My first job was as a laborer at a local construction company and EVERY foreman there was someone who was, as little as a year or so before, one of the regular laborers or tradesmen.   None had any special training in management, and in fact, one or two had about zero respect from the group because they were all friends in the same clique. 

It might be a little different in the unions, but while I learned certain management skills in school, most of the people I worked with in the trades had little to no management skills and survived largely on whatever people skills they had.

[Skeever]

I saw this earlier, and thought it was great.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/opinion/business-economics/work-office-whole-self.html

So many corporate I.D.E. programs want to act like you can just "be yourself" at work. It's all we hear these days, where I am. I loved this part:

But “bringing your whole self to work” is a cheap benefit — easier for employers to provide than, say, a raise — and one vague enough to be largely meaningless. Nor is it available to the majority of the American work force. Nobody is asking a line worker or customer service representative to add more personal vulnerability to the enterprise. For most gainfully employed people, it’s not work’s job to provide self-fulfillment or self-actualization. It’s to put food on the table.

After all, the office isn’t the only place you exist — why should they get to have all of you? If you only bring the best parts of you or at the very least, the part of you that does the actual work, you’re more likely to get rewarded for it.

[Stadler]

I saw this earlier, and thought it was great.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/opinion/business-economics/work-office-whole-self.html

So many corporate I.D.E. programs want to act like you can just "be yourself" at work. It's all we hear these days, where I am. I loved this part:

But “bringing your whole self to work” is a cheap benefit — easier for employers to provide than, say, a raise — and one vague enough to be largely meaningless. Nor is it available to the majority of the American work force. Nobody is asking a line worker or customer service representative to add more personal vulnerability to the enterprise. For most gainfully employed people, it’s not work’s job to provide self-fulfillment or self-actualization. It’s to put food on the table.

After all, the office isn’t the only place you exist — why should they get to have all of you? If you only bring the best parts of you or at the very least, the part of you that does the actual work, you’re more likely to get rewarded for it.

What if "all of me" is that I don't want even HALF of you?  If I need you to complete a task (or not do something stupid), I'm not interested in your "real self", I'm interested in whether that task gets completed, or if it can't, that you give me a heads up so I'm not caught with my pants down.  I have friends at work, and I value some of them, but I have to work with ALL my co-workers whether I'm friends with them or not.  To me, some of this stuff distracts from the matter at hand.  if your "real self" HELPS getting the task done, then fine, but if it hinders, I'm not interested.

[Ben_Jamin]

I work with some great coworkers but their work ethic isn't that great enough to get things done when we need to sometimes. Our store gets busy, especially now for football, and we need everyone to be on their game or at least show effort in trying. Us being busy is why each of us in the BoH should understand and know how to do mostly every position of BoH, so if needed, we can step in if someone needs to step out.

It's not a hard job, it's why I wonder why they don't bother doing this, which does help us out a lot when we get someone who does. I am glad we have more people with the attitude and understanding of what this job entails regarding being efficient in getting these orders out correctly and without receiving any complaints.

Basically, it's a good day when there isn't a lot of complaints about missing food, or other items like forks, straws, ketchup, and sides of ranch, blue cheese, or honey mustard.

A lot of us really are ourselves, especially the teens and as long as their work ethic keeps everything running smoothly, then the shift leaders and managers don't have a problem with "being yourself."

[wolfking]

If being yourself at work is taking the absolute piss, then a have a few below me and above me that are all over it.

[TAC]

I can't read the article without signing in to something.

[KevShmev]

I can't read the article without signing in to something.

Same.  Few things are more infuriating than seeing a link to an article that everyone cannot read.  Not everyone wants to sign up to the NY freaking Times or knows the magic link to bypass it.

[wolfking]

Yeah, no good for me either.  I ain't signing up to ya NYTimes, get fucked.

[Skeever]

I saw this earlier, and thought it was great.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/25/opinion/business-economics/work-office-whole-self.html

So many corporate I.D.E. programs want to act like you can just "be yourself" at work. It's all we hear these days, where I am. I loved this part:

But “bringing your whole self to work” is a cheap benefit — easier for employers to provide than, say, a raise — and one vague enough to be largely meaningless. Nor is it available to the majority of the American work force. Nobody is asking a line worker or customer service representative to add more personal vulnerability to the enterprise. For most gainfully employed people, it’s not work’s job to provide self-fulfillment or self-actualization. It’s to put food on the table.

After all, the office isn’t the only place you exist — why should they get to have all of you? If you only bring the best parts of you or at the very least, the part of you that does the actual work, you’re more likely to get rewarded for it.

What if "all of me" is that I don't want even HALF of you?  If I need you to complete a task (or not do something stupid), I'm not interested in your "real self", I'm interested in whether that task gets completed, or if it can't, that you give me a heads up so I'm not caught with my pants down.  I have friends at work, and I value some of them, but I have to work with ALL my co-workers whether I'm friends with them or not.  To me, some of this stuff distracts from the matter at hand.  if your "real self" HELPS getting the task done, then fine, but if it hinders, I'm not interested.

That's just the thing, at my job it means the oversharers are more empowered and entitled to overshare. And the people who need a little nudge to be drawn out fade Into the backdrop even further.

[Phoenix87x]

I quiet quit a couple years ago, but not totally.

My job is life or death in a hospital. The staffing is inconsistent and random on a daily basis. And the average co-worker combination is usually not good. So I got really tired of doing all the work and being told no and getting attitude by techs that don't feel like working.

So I'm pretty checked out now. I do my job, but am no longer going above and beyond. And also don't get as frustrated when the ship sinks. I just laugh it off. I also found a way to take as much time off as possible, removing myself from the bad environment, which has been the solution so far. 

All the problems were brought up by me to management multiple times over multiple years with no change. They let the inmates run the asylum and I'm not gonna let it mess me up mentally anymore.

[wolfking]

I quiet quit a couple years ago, but not totally.

My job is life or death in a hospital. The staffing is inconsistent and random on a daily basis. And the average co-worker combination is usually not good. So I got really tired of doing all the work and being told no and getting attitude by techs that don't feel like working.

So I'm pretty checked out now. I do my job, but am no longer going above and beyond. And also don't get as frustrated when the ship sinks. I just laugh it off. I also found a way to take as much time off as possible, removing myself from the bad environment, which has been the solution so far. 

All the problems were brought up by me to management multiple times over multiple years with no change. They let the inmates run the asylum and I'm not gonna let it mess me up mentally anymore.

I've been at a crossroads most of this year.  This situation seems similar to me but in different ways.

My issue is moving forward, how does one stop going above and beyond what they are doing to step back, do the minimum to still fulfill your role just to get paid?  I mean, I get why that transition takes place, I'm there but then don't you lose a sense of worth, purpose and sense of achievement and fulfilment by taking so much of your investment out of your work.  This question isn't specifically aimed at you mate just in general.

Does one feel a sense of emptiness and hollowness because of this shift?  I know how invested I've been in years so maybe on a whole it wouldn't be as huge a shift as the masses, who knows.

I know there's probably a sense of freedom with it all but personally I can see it going the other way.  This is why employers take advantage of employees like me, I do get that.

[Skeever]

I've been at a crossroads most of this year.  This situation seems similar to me but in different ways.

My issue is moving forward, how does one stop going above and beyond what they are doing to step back, do the minimum to still fulfill your role just to get paid?  I mean, I get why that transition takes place, I'm there but then don't you lose a sense of worth, purpose and sense of achievement and fulfilment by taking so much of your investment out of your work.  This question isn't specifically aimed at you mate just in general.

Does one feel a sense of emptiness and hollowness because of this shift?  I know how invested I've been in years so maybe on a whole it wouldn't be as huge a shift as the masses, who knows.

I know there's probably a sense of freedom with it all but personally I can see it going the other way.  This is why employers take advantage of employees like me, I do get that.

Personally, I feel like "doing the bare minimum" is never an option, even if you're setting strong work/life boundaries. You've got to find some way to make your job worthwhile to you while you're there, and if you really can't do that, you've got to be dedicating yourself to finding a new job, or else have some other hobby that's driving you to advance. I can't imagine going to work, phoning it in for 8 hours, and then vegging out in front of a videogame or sports binge for the rest of the waking hours of the day. 

[Lonk]

I can't read the article without signing in to something.

Same.  Few things are more infuriating than seeing a link to an article that everyone cannot read.  Not everyone wants to sign up to the NY freaking Times or knows the magic link to bypass it.

Yeah, no good for me either.  I ain't signing up to ya NYTimes, get fucked.

For future use, you can input the link here and bypass the sign up.

https://archive.ph/


Here is the article:

https://archive.ph/3BRSY

[lordxizor]

I've been at a crossroads most of this year.  This situation seems similar to me but in different ways.

My issue is moving forward, how does one stop going above and beyond what they are doing to step back, do the minimum to still fulfill your role just to get paid?  I mean, I get why that transition takes place, I'm there but then don't you lose a sense of worth, purpose and sense of achievement and fulfilment by taking so much of your investment out of your work.  This question isn't specifically aimed at you mate just in general.

Does one feel a sense of emptiness and hollowness because of this shift?  I know how invested I've been in years so maybe on a whole it wouldn't be as huge a shift as the masses, who knows.

I know there's probably a sense of freedom with it all but personally I can see it going the other way.  This is why employers take advantage of employees like me, I do get that.

Personally, I feel like "doing the bare minimum" is never an option, even if you're setting strong work/life boundaries. You've got to find some way to make your job worthwhile to you while you're there, and if you really can't do that, you've got to be dedicating yourself to finding a new job, or else have some other hobby that's driving you to advance. I can't imagine going to work, phoning it in for 8 hours, and then vegging out in front of a videogame or sports binge for the rest of the waking hours of the day. 

I agree that doing the bare minimum isn't an option for me during the work day, but limiting myself to 8 hours a day and not touching my phone or computer for work related things after hours is 100% reasonable. There are plenty of things to do after hours that are more fulfilling that watching tv or playing video games.

[wolfking]

I guess it's the stripping things back and doing less but still finding a strong sense of purpose and ownership of something in what you do is what I struggle with.  You take that away then yeah, you're almost just turning up and killing your 8 hours waiting to leave again, that's not worth any amount of money IMO.

[Dublagent66]

I guess it's the stripping things back and doing less but still finding a strong sense of purpose and ownership of something in what you do is what I struggle with.  You take that away then yeah, you're almost just turning up and killing your 8 hours waiting to leave again, that's not worth any amount of money IMO.

That's a good point and it's a distinguishable difference.  By that, I mean the difference between someone coming into a job, doing the bare minimum and never really establishing their identity otherwise; as opposed to someone who has worked hard, put in the time, and eventually found a way to make their job/life balance easier but still providing the same results.  It's the old adage of "work smarter, not harder" and people can do that but not without putting in the initial work first.

On a similar note, but not really the same thing as "quiet quitting"; just learned today that a company executive (where I work) came in one day, packed up his shit and quit the same day.  Now, he's a CEO for another company within days of the announcement of his departure.  You can put 2 and 2 together on that one.  If executives are pulling this kind of shit, how can they blame regular employees for doing it?  What a shitty leader by example and I wonder if the company he works for now even knows about it.  He could end up doing the same thing to them.

[KevShmev]

I guess we can add "rage applying" to the list...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2023/01/09/rage-applying-to-jobs-is-the-newest-tiktok-trend/?utm_source=ForbesMainTwitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflowForbesMainTwitter&sh=3820e2995c42

This all just feels like "I want to get paid a lot of money, but to hell with it if you expect me to work hard."  But what do you expect from a concept that originated on TikTok. 

[XJDenton]

To me it feels like they are feeling undervalued for the work they already do. I'm not certain the concept of "looking to move jobs if your current one doesn't value you" originated on tiktok.

[XeRocks81]

chuckling at young people on tik tok thinking they're re-inventing the wheel every couple of weeks.    Or maybe it's the coverage that makes it sound like that?   Anyway yeah it seems they just "invented"  ... looking for a job.

[Cool Chris]

I'm not certain the concept of "looking to move jobs if your current one doesn't value you" originated on tiktok.

Correct. Neither did complaining about it. The only new thing here is doing in all on social media believing the rest of the world cares about your problems.

[Skeever]

Younger people expect the world to work like school - put the effort in, get rewarded, and progress.

Unfortunately, most organizations aren't run like that at all, with very little to offer overachievers.

Thus "quiet quitting" and "rage applying" are two sides of the same coin - reactions the young people have when they realize that most workplaces are stale structures stuck in a 50s hierarchal paradigm. "This place can't make the most of my talents or help me grow, and putting in extra gets me nothing, so I'll either focus on life outside work and work-life balance (quiet quitting) or find some place that values me (rage applying)."

[jammindude]

I'm not certain the concept of "looking to move jobs if your current one doesn't value you" originated on tiktok.

Correct. Neither did complaining about it. The only new thing here is doing in all on social media believing the rest of the world cares about your problems.

Great post.

It reminds me that my dad told me at 16, “Son…NO ONE CARES!”

At the time, I thought that was “so cruel”. After all, what kind of parent would tell their child such a horrible thing!!  Only decades later did it dawn on me that he was right. And he was trying to prepare me for the reality of life. And it was one of the most important things he ever taught me.

[Stadler]

To me it feels like they are feeling undervalued for the work they already do. I'm not certain the concept of "looking to move jobs if your current one doesn't value you" originated on tiktok.

The important part of all this is that ever-pervasive "feeling undervalued".   That's a mindset, pure and simple.  I can't imagine where this idea came from that third parties have to coddle you and tell you how great you are, and make you feel appreciated and "valued".   My god.  Do they wipe your ass for you when you go to the can?

I don't mean this to be cruel or "old man"; it's just the reality of the false expectations that permeate our society today.   I need to be loved at work.  I need perfect strangers to call me the exact pronoun I demand.  I need my television to be perfectly non-offensive, regardless of what anyone else wants.  I need my social media to tell me in real time how much I'm liked. We've morphed into a society that is like Skeever said; that you do a task and get a reward. Life isn't a video game like that.  You don't defeat the boss and get a chest of gold and neat swords as a reward.

I can count on two hands the number of people that I really, well and truly care what they think about my value and two of them passed this past year.  Yeah, I care that my friends - bigger than two hands, blessed - feel appreciated, but at the end of the day, if my friends aren't rewarding me with sufficient praise, that's between me and my therapist.  They don't exist to build my ego.  Work is well on the other side of that.

[lordxizor]

Younger people expect the world to work like school - put the effort in, get rewarded, and progress.

I think this is exactly it. I don't think its limited to young people, though it's certainly more prevalent."

Employee: "Job description for Peon I says 0-2 years of experience. Peon II says 3-5 years of experience. I have been a Peon I for three years therefore I deserve a promotion."

Boss: "But you've never shown me you are capable of performing the additional duties a Peon II would perform."

Employee: "Well, those duties weren't in my job description."

Boss: "I'm giving the promotion to the guy who was willing to go a little above and beyond  on Project X to show he's capable of performing at the next level."

Employee: "But I've been a Peon I for 3 years!"