 |
|
|
|||||
As more companies demand employees spend more days in their workplaces each week, some critics claim that tightening return to office (RTO) rules in part aim to provoke resignations from employees unwilling to give up their remote or hybrid work arrangements. Data now suggests employer use of that indirect quiet-firing manner of reducing head count is far more widespread than previously suspected and often involves tactics that go beyond ordering people back to their desks. Reinforced RTO mandates, especially by large companies like Amazon and Starbucks, sparked accusations that management’s tighter in-office requirements are a cover for pushing flexibility-loving workers to quit. It turns out, businesses are also using other methods to trim head count, including cutting worker benefits, increasing workloads, delaying pay raises, or gradually isolating targets in the workplace until they resign. A recent survey of 1,128 U.S. business leaders by CV writing platform ResumeTemplates found 42 percent of respondents admitted to having used those quiet-firing strategies this year, with an additional 11 percent saying they plan to do so in coming months. The main reason that total of 53 percent of participants said theyd employed the stratagem was to avoid severance, legal, and other costs that layoffs usually generate. They also credited the ruse with averting the bad blood and even worse reputational damage that firing people can create. In addition to establishing that a small majority of employers have or intend to resort to quiet firing this year, the survey also identified the most common methods that managers use to passively push workers toward the door. Delaying promised raises topped the list, with 47 percent of participants citing the tactic. That compared with 46 percent of respondents who said theyd tightened RTO or other workplace rules, 45 percent who increased workloads without compensation, and 32 percent who cut wages or benefits to sour employees on their jobs. Micromanaging workers or, inversely, cutting them out of projects and consultations entirely was another method mentioned, as was ignoring toxic environments that undermine the well-being of people designated for departure. The scenarios for which the passive maneuver to lower head count was used varied. Around 41 percent of participating managers said theyd deployed it against specific employees theyd deemed troublesome, problematic, or simply unwanted. That included 47 percent of respondents who said theyd embraced quiet firing to get rid of underperforming employees, and 41 percent whod used it with staff who complained about or resisted strengthened RTO rules. Just over a third of participants said the method allowed them to sidestep severance payments that often accompany formal layoffs, with an equal 34 percent crediting it with lowering the attendant legal headaches. Around 32 percent said the passively manipulative approach allowed them to avoid the bad external publicity that can arise when businesses cut staff. But company owners and executives who answered the survey also noted there were broader economic and business reasons that made lowering head count necessary. In many cases, quiet firing was ultimately selected as the means to achieve that. The most frequently cited of those external pressures was slowing revenue and sales, at 50 percent. Adjusting to increased costs from import tariffs was second, at 46 percent. Nearly 40 percent of participants said staff reductions had already been or will be made this year in anticipation of a recession, and the same percentage pointed to wage inflation as a factor in cuts. But in spite of the frequent and increasing recourse to quiet firing, its results received mixed reviews from survey respondents. A whopping 85 percent of participants called it a somewhat or very effective way of influencing employees to leave with lower costs and legal hassles. But 98 percent of respondents acknowledged the technique also had a negative effect on workplace morale, with nearly 40 percent describing that erosion as considerable. For that reason alone, Julia Toothacre, ResumeTemplates’ chief career strategist, warned that quiet firing is a double-edged sword employers should think entirely through before using. From a business perspective, quiet firing can seem like an efficient way to reduce head count without triggering layoffs, bad press, or severance costs, Toothacre said in comments about the survey’s results. But its shortsighted. Creating an environment that pushes people to quit inevitably damages morale, productivity, and trust. It can also negatively impact hiring in the future. And lets be honest, when this tactic is applied broadly, companies risk losing high performers, not just underperformers. Another possible result is businesses not losing anyone at all. Survey respondents reported that employees targeted by quiet firing dont always quit as hoped especially in an increasingly challenging labor market. Indeed, 77 percent of participants said some of their quiet-firing efforts had failed when workers decided that finding a new job elsewhere would be more arduous than roughing it out where they were. One reason for that fatalism, 53 percent of responding managers said in their rather depressing view of the modern workforce, is that a large number of current workers simply tolerate poor treatment rather than quitting. That may wind up leaving manipulating executives with more than they bargained for. Because refusals of targeted employees to quit can have potentially negative consequences for the workplaces they remain in and the employers who wanted them gone. Many workers will stick it out right now not because theyre engaged, but because the job market feels uncertain, Toothacre said. Theyre weighing the stress of a toxic workplace against the risk of landing a new job that pays less. This calculator puts employees in survival mode, which will ultimately impact productivity. In other words, although quiet firing is spreading among businesses, its lower costs and confrontations up front may well be offset by lower workplace happiness and productivity over time. By Bruce Crumley This article originally appeared on Fast Company‘s sister publication, Inc. Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
Category:
E-Commerce
The global race for better batteries has never been more intense. Electric vehicles, drones, and next-generation aircraft all depend on high-performance energy storageyet the traditional approach to battery R&D is struggling to keep pace with demand. Innovation and investment alone wont solve the problem, unless we compress the timeline. Speed is now the defining barrier between potential and impact. Even as AI speeds up materials discovery, battery lifetime still dictates success: each charge-discharge cycle lasts about six hours, so proving out 500 cycles can take up to eight months, turning lifetime testing into the key bottleneck for promising chemistries. Thats changing. Physics-informed AI is redefining battery development. National labs like NREL have shown how neural networks can diagnose battery health 1,000 times faster than conventional models, bringing real-time insight into degradation and performance. The Real Cost of Traditional Testing Battery development has always been a waiting game. Consider the mathematics: testing at a standard C/3 rate allows for just two complete cycles per day. Multiply that across different chemistries, protocols, and form factors, and you’re looking at years of validation before a single product reaches market. This isn’t just inefficientit’s becoming unsustainable. While battery researchers methodically work through their testing cycles, the market landscape shifts beneath them. New competitors emerge, customer requirements evolve, and breakthrough technologies risk becoming obsolete before they’re even validated. The industry needs a fundamental shift in how it approaches innovation. Why Conventional AI Isn’t the Answer Many companies have turned to traditional machine learning, hoping to accelerate their development cycles. But conventional AI tools face critical limitations in battery applications: Data scarcity: Unlike consumer tech, battery research generates relatively small, messy datasets that resist standard ML approaches. Black box problem: Correlation-based models might identify patterns, but they can’t explain why those patterns exist, which is a nonstarter in a field governed by strict electrochemical and thermodynamic principles. Regulatory challenges: Engineers and regulators need to understand not just what an AI predicts, but why it makes those predictions. Enter Physics-Informed AI Physics-informed AI represents a fundamental departure from conventional approaches. Instead of learning patterns from data alone, these models embed physical laws directly into their architecture. The result is AI that doesn’t just recognize correlationsit correlates with the underlying physics. This approach transforms how we think about battery development. Rather than waiting months for empirical validation, physics-informed models can simulate real battery behavior with remarkable accuracy. They account for aging, degradation, thermal stress, and mechanical factorsall grounded in established scientific principles. At Factorial, we’ve achieved something that seemed impossible just years ago: predicting cycle life outcomes after just 12 weeks of early testing, compared to the 36 months typically required. Software-Driven Breakthroughs The impact extends beyond faster testing. Using our newly launched Gammatron platforma proprietary physics-informed AI systemwe recently optimized a fast-charging protocol without altering any physical components. The result: a twofold improvement in cycle life, achieved entirely through software. Gammatron, developed to simulate and predict battery behavior with high accuracy, has transformed our approach to development with Stellantis. By forecasting long-term performance from just two weeks of early data, the platform helped accelerate validation timelines and informed protocol adjustments that significantly extended battery lifespan, without changing chemistry or hardware. Were not the only ones seeing this level of transformation. At The Battery Show Europe, Monolith CEO Richard Ahlfeld shared that his company, working with Cellforce Group, is using AI to reduce battery materials testing requirements by up to 70%, while maintaining or even improving discovery rates. These aren’t theoretical savings. Monolith reports 2040% reductions in testing across active partner projects today, accelerating products to market by months. This represents a new paradigm in battery developmentone where software innovations can drive hardware-level gains. As our models continuously learn from new lab data, they evolve in real time, accelerating innovation throughout the entire product lifecycle. his combination of AI and lab data enables a feedback loop that isnt seen in traditional AI models. Transforming Industry Standards Physics-informed AI enables capabilities that were previously impossible: Precision matching: Align specific chemistries with target applications based on predictive performance modeling rather than trial and error. Virtual prototyping: Simulate performance outcomes before investing in physical prototypes, dramatically reducing development costs and timelines. Intelligent optimization: Fine-tune charging protocols for optimal speed and safety without extensive physical testing. Predictive monitoring: Identify potential failure modes early in the development cycle, reducing both risk and cost. Perhaps most importantly, these tools support continuous learning throughout the product lifecycle. As new materials, processes, and data become available, the models evolve, enabling rapid adaptation across diverse battery platforms and applications. The Simulation-First Future We’re witnessing the emergence of a new development paradigmdigital cell design. Tomorrow’s battery breakthroughs will begin not in physical labs, but in sophisticated simulations that combine domain expertise, experimental validation, and intelligent AI modeling. This shift from hardware-first to data-first innovation will separate industry leaders from followers. Companies that can seamlessly integrate these capabilities will unlock longer range, faster charging, and greater resilience, solving what are fundamentally systems challenges rather than just materials challenges. The tools exist today. The question isn’t whether this transformation will happen, but how quickly companies will adapt to leverage these capabilities.
Category:
E-Commerce
Matt Losak got interested in evictions when he was nearly subject to one. He was working for a union, which required frequent travel. One month he accidentally left his rent check on his refrigerator and left. He called the property manager, who told him it wouldnt be a problem as long as he gave her the check when he returned and paid a $25 late fee, all of which he did. Six weeks later, he received an eviction notice for failure to pay rent. Losak fought the eviction off by proving that the property owners had signed the eviction papers after having already cashed his check. I caught them by the toe, he said. But the experience focused him on the fact that, in most places, landlords can move to evict tenants for any reason. Its one part of why evictions have been climbing steadily since the pandemic, even outpacing pre-pandemic levels in some places. Losak helped found Renters United Maryland in 2017, and enshrining good cause protection from eviction was his number-one issue. Good cause laws require landlords to have a specific reason for evicting someone or terminating their lease, although typically tenants can still be removed for things like violating lease agreements or failing to pay rent. The lack of good cause protections, is a major loophole, he says, allowing a landlord to, based on whim and caprice, rip somebody out of their home. When Losak first started advocating for good cause, he says state lawmakers literally laughed in my face. They didnt buy that it was a big problem, not to mention that landlords and their lobbyists, who oppose such laws, hold huge sway. But his organization has worked to build support over the years. It pushed the idea that a lack of stable housing leads to concrete costs in mental and physical health declines, lower academic achievement for children, and higher crime rates. Theres all types of costs, financial and social, that people are beginning to recognize are directly related to unstable or poor quality homes, he says. The Pandemic Effect Then came the pandemic, which clearly was an accelerant and focused state lawmakers attention on housing policy, he says. In 2020, experts and analysts put the number of potential evictions at anywhere between 17 million and 28 million. That fear of widespread evictions led courts and others to look at the eviction process differently and try things out, says Sarah Gallagher, vice president of state and local innovation at the National Low Income Housing Coalition. Eventually eviction moratoria and rental assistance would help to keep the number of evictions low. Now, however, those protections are gone and rents are rising rapidly. The housing crisis, Gallagher says, is even worse than it was before the pandemic. Rents rose 29% between 2019 and 2023 and homelessness is at a record high. So lawmakers have been looking for other tools to continue helping people stay housed. Maryland was among a number of other states that considered good cause eviction protections during this years legislative session. After a bottleneck against advancing legislation was ousted, the bill came close to passage. Losak was able to marshal support from a wide coalition that included the ACLU, NAACP, unions, and even the governor. Legislation passed the state house, only to die in the senate under pressure from landlord lobbies. Losak noted that next year is an election year for the Maryland legislature. There is a bubble of anger and frustration that is growing among a huge number of Marylanders that might very well have a political impact, he says. Were optimistic. Fights are now brewing in Chicago and Rhode Island. These cities and states are looking to join a growing movement: 11 states and 27 localities have now passed good cause laws. The majority of those laws were passed in the years since 2020. It is gaining momentum, Gallagher says. Reducing eviction rates Research has found that these laws reduce eviction filing rates, keeping people both housed and firmly rooted in their communities. Academics have also found that good cause protections in California, Oregon, and New Hampshire didnt decrease housing production after they passed. New York State passed good cause eviction protection last year that went into effect immediately in New York City and allowed other places to opt in. It used to be that, as long as a New York landlord filled out all the forms correctly, it could evict someone. But now landlords cant just say, Well, I want this person out, says Judith Goldiner, attorney in charge of the civil law reform unit at The Legal Aid Society. Under the new law, landlords have to offer their tenants a lease renewal unless they can prove they have a good reason not to, such as illegal behavior or the need to demolish a building. It also capped rent increases. But the law came with a long list of exceptions, including any building built after 2009, luxury buildings, and buildings owned by someone with a portfolio of 10 or fewer units. The carveouts mean that, while its a useful tool, Goldiner says, it is often unduly complicated and hard to explain. It can be hard even to figure out what entity owns buildings, let alone how many others they own. The law is still new, so there havent been decisions hammering out exactly what counts as a good cause for evicting someone. Still, Goldiner knows of a number of tenants who were able to use it to negotiate leases instead of ending up in eviction proceedings. Definitely its been really helpful for a lot of people to actually avoid litigation, she says. Expanding tenant protections Good cause laws wont stop evictions all on their own. There isnt one protection thats going to do it all, Gallagher says. You have to look at putting in tenant protections at all stages of the housing and eviction process. That includs starting with regulating how tenants are screened by landlords so they arent discriminated against all the way to sealing eviction records after tenants are forced out so they arent penalized when trying to get housing in the future. Still, good cause laws are particularly important because they help insulate tenants from retaliation for asserting any rights they do have. They enable tenants to speak out against unsafe or unhealthy housing conditions or other abuses. Under good cause laws, landlords cant kick people out just because they, say, asked for repairs. And policies like right to counsel, which guarantees legal representation in eviction proceedings, are only useful if there are actual rights for lawyers to defend. If tenants dont have the ability to advocate for their rights, then what good is the protection? Gallagher says.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||