No one is the villain in their own story - but if you want this bit "I am honest and passionate" to jive, then these bits "How to implement the do the bare minimum? Searching for another job is not an option at this point. I would rather wait for them to fire me." gotta go.
Either do a good job, or leave for somewhere else where you can. Anything else is not the activity of an honest and passionate person. You can rationalize all you want, some things are out of your control, but the one thing solely in your control is how you behave. Staying on a job doing the bare minimum until you get fired because you've decided that the effort involved in improving your situation is "not an option" is a choice, and not one that reflects well on you.
Not to mention that self sabotaging your good work habits is counter-productive. You may think that you are getting one over them, but it's just as likely that after a few months of doing bare minimum, it will become your new "default" behaviour and carry over to your new job/endeavor.
And it has other unintended consequences. People go out for drinks. People talk. If your potential future employer is a friend of your boss he'll find out pretty quickly you are "a nice guy but an under-performer". Do you really want to be that guy?
You’d be surprised. I live in a city where in the tech sector, everyone knows everyone. I always joke that I can make 4 phone calls and find out about any engineer in the area because they’ve certainly crossed paths with mutual acquaintances.
I'm not sure about this. Given that OP is being managed out and the culture is toxic, their relationship with this company has an expiration date anyway, the question is how to manage things in the meantime. I don't see the point of putting in a lot of extra effort given that it won't be rewarded in any way.
Always? Pretty sure that there are also toxic people who just go about their lives without realising how they affect others.
And even if you’re right, there should be some nontoxic people in toxic environments and they should able to talk about it without someone immediately accusing them of being the problem.
Perhaps, but reading through other responses, a clear picture is starting to form.
OP admits to wanting to "teach the company a lesson"[1], and then responded to another commentor, who advised they fake a personal crisis and play victim and referred to women as people with "oily holes between their legs", that this was "interesting and worth implementing"[2].
Actually you can do whatever you want and there won't be any consequences. The scare tactic that they will talk of some perception to others and single you out is as non-important as your effort during the context that you know you are being phased out. The commenter is creating a moral soap box which when opened smells bad. If you want to treat them the way they treat you, game theory is on your side.
You are conflating morals with ethics. Ethically, compensation negotiations, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are based on the assumption of good faith reasonable best efforts. If you continue to draw your salary while ceasing to provide reasonable best efforts, you are intentionally acting in bad faith and the employer has grounds for termination or at least reduction in pay. You are of course free to do whatever you choose, and there may or may not be any professional consequences. But the OP indicated they are an honest person - intentionally acting in bad faith while continuing to draw a paycheck is not honest. Honest would be to either move on, or tell the employer you intend to reduce your efforts, and I think we know what the result would be.
> If you continue to draw your salary while ceasing to provide reasonable best efforts, you are intentionally acting in bad faith and the employer has grounds for termination or at least reduction in pay.
I know you're mostly focused on OP's use of the word "honest", but I think that misses something.
The term "reasonable best effort" is biased in favor of the employer since companies recognize that mediocre performance (relative to the position) is the norm. They also recognize that people like OP exist, and are more than happy to take advantage of them since they aren't likely to aggressively negotiate for what they're actually worth (and actually get it), and that not everyone has the luxury of just switching jobs to not get overly exploited. It's also tricky because things change over time, and what once was fair or mutually beneficial may no longer be, and by then, it be can be tricky to transition out of that.
I do think OP needs to reflect upon why they stayed at this place if they've felt taken for granted for so long. At the same time, I understand the frustration and sense of futility that comes with feeling like you want to give your best, but that you're not in an environment conducive to that.
I also don't think honesty is so binary to where if OP scales back effort in order to transition out of this role, that they can no longer claim to be "honest". Nor does honesty necessarily imply putting oneself in a precarious position and quitting before they're able to do so, especially since I doubt OP's higher-ups have any expectation of being honest and transparent with them that their days are numbered regardless of performance.
edit: I didn't see OP's reply to other commenters and assumed good faith. Nonetheless, I stand by my comment even if it no longer applies to this particular situation
I think in a good faith situation, a scaling back while transitioning out is totally fair. That's a far cry different from intentionally trying to figure out how to do the bare minimum while also refusing to look elsewhere though. I think we are on the same page.
I get your point. I still am honest. But they have taken me for granted for way too long. Hence I am contemplating doing the bare minimum. ( I dont see anything wrong with this either since good work is anyway not appreciated. Those who are rewarded aren't doing anything great either. Majority of them are are well connected with the key people in management)
There is that rationalization I mentioned. If you "are still honest", walk into your bosses office and make it clear you intend to do the minimum and your reasons why. That is honest. Perhaps they will be fine with it. Perhaps they will renegotiate your pay. Perhaps they will let you go. Either way you will have been honest. Otherwise just stop tossing the word honest around and go about your business.
Either do a good job, or leave for somewhere else where you can. Anything else is not the activity of an honest and passionate person. You can rationalize all you want, some things are out of your control, but the one thing solely in your control is how you behave. Staying on a job doing the bare minimum until you get fired because you've decided that the effort involved in improving your situation is "not an option" is a choice, and not one that reflects well on you.