Quiet Cutting—How the Talent Landscape Is Shifting

Quiet quitting arose out of the rise of rejecting hustle culture and the desire for people to create a separation between work and home. In what some may consider a response to this trend, Recruitment agencies in Toronto are noticing a new trend: quiet cutting. Companies are reassessing employees and shifting roles and responsibilities rather than outright firing or laying off employees.

In this blog, we’ll discuss:

What is quiet cutting?
Why are employers doing quiet cutting?
What are the risks to employers that do quiet cutting?
What are the signs your job is being quietly cut?
How does quiet cutting shift the talent landscape?

Top takeaways about quiet cutting

Quiet cutting is a subtle workforce strategy where employers reassign employees to less desirable roles instead of laying them off, often as a cost-saving or performance management tactic.
While it can help companies avoid layoffs and negative publicity, quietly cutting risks damaging employee trust, morale, and long-term retention.
This trend is reshaping the talent landscape by increasing job insecurity, prompting passive job-seeking, and putting pressure on employer branding and workforce transparency.

What is quiet cutting?

Quiet cutting is a workplace strategy where employers reassign employees to different roles, often less desirable ones, instead of laying them off directly. It’s a subtler alternative to firing or downsizing. The benefit for the employee is that even though they are receiving a demotion, they still have a job. However, many who are quietly cut may not see this situation in a positive light.

Employees impacted by quiet cutting may feel undervalued, demoted, or pushed out, even if their pay remains the same. It’s often seen as a sign of organizational change or internal cost-cutting measures.

Quiet quitting vs. quiet cutting – what’s the difference?

Quiet quitting emerged as a trend a few years ago. Some employees, to create more balance or outright reject hustle culture, started doing only what’s required in their job description. They did nothing more and nothing less. They meet expectations, but don’t go above and beyond.

Quiet cutting is a similar type of trend from employers. Rather than fire an employee, they move them to a lesser role in the company. For some employers, this could be a response to employees who choose to quietly quit and do the bare minimum.

Why are employers doing quiet cutting?

Employers are using quiet cutting for strategic reasons. With the uncertainty of the economy right now, many companies are looking for ways to operate more efficiently.

Cost savings: Reassigning roles can be cheaper than layoffs since it avoids severance packages, unemployment claims, and the costs of hiring replacements later.
Avoiding negative publicity: Layoffs can damage a company’s reputation and employee morale. Quiet cutting is a subtler way to reduce staff or shift resources without headlines.
Managing underperformance: Some companies use it to push out employees who aren’t meeting expectations, hoping they’ll quit rather than be formally terminated.
Workforce realignment: As business priorities shift, companies may need to reallocate talent to different departments or roles without going through formal restructuring.

What are the risks to employers that do quiet cutting?

While quiet cutting can help employers reach their desired objective, they risk facing other issues. This practice is viewed by many as a way to make employees unhappy so they will quit. It can affect morale, trust, and potentially harm your employer brand.

Damaged trust: Employees may feel blindsided, undervalued, or manipulated, leading to a breakdown in trust between staff and leadership. This could cause other top employees to lose trust in your company.
Low morale and engagement: Being reassigned to a less desirable role without transparent communication can make employees feel demoted or unwanted, lowering motivation and productivity. It can also have other employees worrying if it will happen to them.
Increased turnover: Workers who feel pushed out or disrespected are more likely to quit, taking skills and knowledge with them, and potentially damaging the company’s reputation in the process.
Legal and ethical risks: Quiet cutting can open the door to claims of discrimination or unfair treatment if employees believe they were reassigned without just cause.
Reputation damage: Word spreads quickly, especially on platforms like Glassdoor or LinkedIn. Quiet cutting can make a company seem disloyal or toxic to current staff and future talent.

What are the signs your job is being quietly cut?

There are a series of signs that a role or employee could be in consideration to be quietly cut. Talk of changing roles, responsibilities and organization structure is the most common. Here are other signs:

You’re reassigned to a different role unexpectedly, especially if it’s outside your skill set, interests, or career path.
Your responsibilities are reduced without explanation or meaningful new work to replace them.
Key projects or clients are taken away and reassigned to others.
You’re excluded from meetings or decisions you used to be part of.
Your manager becomes less communicative, vague, or avoids discussing your future with the company.
You’re moved to a lower-visibility team or a role that feels like a step backward.
Your performance is suddenly questioned, despite no previous issues.
You’re being pressured to accept a role change without a clear reason or chance for input.

If you notice several of these signs, it’s a good idea to seek clarity from your manager or HR and to start preparing a backup plan in case a transition is being forced.

How does quiet cutting shift the talent landscape?

Quiet cutting shifts the talent landscape by subtly reshaping how companies manage their workforce and how employees view job security and loyalty. Here’s five main things that can be affected:

Increased employee uncertainty: As quiet cutting becomes more common, employees may feel less secure in their roles, even without formal layoffs. This can erode trust in employers and increase anxiety in the workplace.
Talent disengagement: When workers are reassigned to roles that don’t match their skills or career goals, it can lead to lower morale, reduced productivity, and eventual turnover.
Shift toward short-term retention: Companies may prioritize flexible talent strategies over long-term employee development, which can weaken loyalty and career path planning.
Rise in passive job-seeking: Employees who feel quietly cut may begin searching for new opportunities, leading to a more fluid job market and greater movement between companies.
Pressure on employer branding: Organizations seen as quietly cutting may struggle to attract top talent, as candidates increasingly value transparency, respect, and job stability.

A final word about quiet cutting

Quiet cutting is a different way to look at talent management and cost effectiveness. It may help companies quickly adapt to change, but it risks undermining employee engagement, weakening company culture, and making talent harder to retain and attract in the long run.

From Quiet Quitting to Quiet Cutting—How the Talent Landscape Is Shifting