I disagree with what I wrote, but who cares.

An AI generated prompt for AP English Language and Composition, Question 3:

    

In recent years, discussions around the concept of "quiet quitting"—a term used to describe employees doing only what their job requires and nothing more—have sparked debate in professional, academic, and social circles. Some argue that this trend represents a healthy boundary between work and personal life, promoting mental well-being and rejecting hustle culture. Others believe it reflects a decline in work ethic, responsibility, and ambition, potentially harming both individual growth and organizational productivity.

Carefully read the following prompt and write an essay that develops your position on the value of "quiet quitting" in modern society.

In your essay, you should:

• Develop a clear thesis.

• Support your argument with appropriate, specific evidence.

• Address opposing views or counterarguments.

• Organize your ideas logically and use a formal style

    "That's not part of my job description". You may have heard this crude and somewhat irreverent phrase thrown around when a superior asks an employee to do something, but it has some partial value in today's society. The concept of "quiet quitting", which describes employees who do the bare minimum of what their job entails, has recently been a hot topic of argument in today's professional workforce. With the state of the current emerging workforce, it is safe to assume that this concept will not be going away soon. Our society has become more lax and less focused on working hard, so it may be better to accept the concept of "quiet quitting". In modern society, the idea of "quiet quitting" is necessary for the enrichment of personal life and for the rejection of large corporations.
    In the age of Generation Z, the old-fashioned mindset of working extremely hard at one's job has sort of fizzled out. In fact, most Gen Z's hardly even want to work. When they do, employers describe them as lazy, entitled, and too sensitive. Our generation simply does not want to work as hard as we used to, so it's nearly impossible to try to force these ideals upon us. Instead, the practice of quiet quitting may serve as a beneficial step for individuals to better themselves and flourish beyond the workplace. Doing the "bare minimum" will give time for individuals to develop their own hobbies, focus on self-improvement activities like exercise and meditation, and make the best version of themselves for when they do work. Focusing on one's own self improvement may actually resolve the issues of being lazy and entitled. That way, the work Gen Z's do put in is actually quality work. They aren't burned out. An employer would likely rather hire an employee that works on themselves, gets adequate rest, and is respectful to others versus a bogged-down workaholic. It might seem lazy, but the impacts of giving space to the individual (at the expense of manpower and a productive workforce) will outweigh the negatives.

    Quiet quitting is also a passive and safer way to reject the greed of large corporations. In reality, your position in a job means almost nothing to the corporation as a whole. If you work for a large corporation like Walmart as a clerk, your single help is a small footnote of the company's worries and concerns. Corporations will try to pay their employees as little as possible in order to make the most amount of money. This is why a lot of them are minimum wage jobs--if they could pay their employees less, they probably would. They have no trouble laying off hundreds of workers, proving that they in fact do not care about you. It would likely be pointless to take your job as serious as possible, since the people that do the bare minimum are getting paid the exact same as you and are likely valued the same (unless, of course, they're a superior) to the company. Quiet quitting can be a way to reject these corporation and their greed, and show that you care about the job as much as they do.

    As us teens enter the workforce, it's important to distinguish the difference between creativity and overworking. There should be no reason employees do nothing at work, but there should be no reason that they do more for free. Stagnation and lack of creativity in the workforce may stem from quiet quitting, but they will also stem from burnout. In a capitalist society that frequently values profit over human beings, we must be open to rejecting these ideals and respecting ourselves. There must be a balance between the two sides. Quiet quitting is a good reminder that work should support life--not consume it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still disagree with a large amount of the points I mentioned. Plus, this topic is so complicated and nuanced that it's nearly impossible to get a good argument in just one essay. I think some companies actually do care about their employees, and believe that we as a society still need to get used to the fact that we gotta get up off our ass and go to work, even if we don't like it. No, it's not fun. No, it's not always enjoyable. That's why it's called work.