More than half of Canadian and American companies are using or plan to use “quiet firing” tactics this year to push employees out without formal layoffs, according to a new survey that reveals widespread use of indirect workforce reduction strategies.
The practice involves making workplace conditions difficult enough that employees choose to quit on their own, allowing companies to avoid severance payments and negative publicity associated with mass layoffs.
A ResumeTemplates survey of 1,128 business leaders conducted in May found that 53 per cent of companies are engaging in quiet firing in 2025, with 42 per cent already implementing the strategy and another 11 per cent planning to start later this year.
Companies cite revenue pressures and tariff costs
The most common reason companies give for reducing staff is slowing revenue or sales, cited by 50 per cent of respondents. Tariffs and increased trade costs follow closely at 46 per cent, while 39 per cent anticipate a recession and cite wage inflation as factors.
About 31 per cent say staff reductions are needed because artificial intelligence or automation is replacing roles, while 26 per cent point to pressure from investors and 25 per cent cite rising real estate or facility costs.
Most companies are making moderate workforce cuts, with 40 per cent reducing staff by five to 10 per cent and 28 per cent cutting between 11 and 25 per cent of employees.
Delayed raises and office mandates top tactics
The most popular quiet firing method is delaying promotions or raises, used by 47 per cent of companies. Other common tactics include enforcing stricter workplace rules or policies (46 per cent), increasing workloads without additional pay (45 per cent), and mandating more in-office days (42 per cent).
Additional strategies include reducing pay or bonuses (35 per cent), micromanaging employees (34 per cent), cutting benefits (32 per cent), and ignoring toxic workplace behaviour (22 per cent).
Nearly half of companies (47 per cent) say quiet firing helps them more easily manage underperforming employees, while 41 per cent use it to push out specific workers, such as those who prefer remote work.
Other motivations include avoiding severance payouts (34 per cent), reducing legal risks (34 per cent), and avoiding bad press from formal layoffs (32 per cent).
Strategy effective but damages morale
Despite widespread acknowledgment that the practice hurts workplace culture, 85 per cent of companies using quiet firing say it has been effective. About 27 per cent call it very effective at reducing headcount, while 58 per cent say it is somewhat effective.
However, the strategy comes with significant costs to employee morale. Among companies that started quiet firing in 2025, 39 per cent say it has reduced morale significantly, and 46 per cent report it has had some negative impact.
“From a business perspective, quiet firing can seem like an efficient way to reduce headcount without triggering layoffs, bad press, or severance costs,” said Julia Toothacre, ResumeTemplates’ chief career strategist. “But it’s short-sighted. Creating an environment that pushes people to quit inevitably damages morale, productivity, and trust. It can also negatively impact hiring in the future.”
Toothacre warned that when applied broadly, companies risk losing high performers, not just underperformers.
Employees staying despite poor treatment
For companies finding quiet firing ineffective, the main challenge is that employees are staying put despite poor treatment. Among those reporting limited success, 77 per cent say workers remain because of a tough job market, while 53 per cent report employees simply tolerate poor conditions rather than quitting.
“Many workers will stick it out right now not because they’re engaged, but because the job market feels uncertain,” Toothacre said. “They’re weighing the stress of a toxic workplace against the risk of landing a new job that pays less. This puts employees in survival mode, which will ultimately impact productivity.”
Formal layoffs continue alongside quiet firing
The use of quiet firing has not replaced traditional layoffs. Nearly 60 per cent of companies say they have already conducted formal layoffs this year.
Looking ahead, 34 per cent plan to conduct layoffs regardless of how effective quiet firing proves to be, while 32 per cent will only implement layoffs if quiet firing fails. Eighteen per cent say they have no layoff plans, and 15 per cent say future decisions depend on other factors.
The survey was conducted between May 20 and May 22, 2025, with participants required to meet specific demographic criteria to ensure appropriate responses.
