All That Free Food at Work: Unethical?

Food. Free. And way too much of it in a work setting, every day. Posters on Reddit scream about the consequences. For instance, here are some snippets for Big Law:

"I gained 80 pounds in my first 5 years in big law"

"I gained 15 pounds in 4 years"

Summer interns also often chime in on that weighty matter. Some completed the season $45k richer and pounds heavier.

This isn't inevitable, other posters declare. For instance, bring your own lunch and restrict the eating to that. Don't peek at the food. Even one bite can set you off.

But coping isn't the issue here. It's the whole matter of free food at work. Is that downright unethical at this time of a growing number of health problems associated with improper eating patterns? They range from diabetes to clogged arteries to obesity. Even supposed "healthy" food could get you in trouble if you consume too much of it.

Yet some businesses position and package the food as a perk. At a gig in customer service I worked when my boutique was slow management kept nudging us to notice how generous the company was with the food. Yeah, high calorie stuff. It was not a stretch to conclude that the real perk would have been a bonus for error-free processing or taking a high-volume of calls. Another kind of reward would have been a higher pay rate.

Large organizations like Big Law can provide alternatives to free food. For example, what about a stipend for purchasing your own lunch? Or boost bonuses or increase how often they're made. Several years ago at Paul, Weiss Brad Karp provided off-season bonuses for the "committed." Those were probably more of a morale builder than a groaning table of food.

As a coach, I am discovering this: Overall, food has become the enemy. The unemployed can wind up packing on the pounds during a search. It's not unthinkable to introduce this policy measure: Classify food as a controlled substance, with regulators monitoring intake, both choice and portion size. The national healthcare bill could plummet. 

Careers? So Over. It’s about Earning a Good Living. No matter what.

Complimentary consultation. No Pressure. Street-smart Guidance. Contact Jane Genova janegenova374@gmail.com. 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

America Not Hiring in 2026: Back to Golden Age of Solopreneurs?

 For hiring, 2025 was a brutal year to search for a job. The Wall Street Journal reports that 2026 could be worse: "At a gathering of CEOs in Midtown Manhattan this month organized by the Yale School of Management, 66% of leaders surveyed said they planned to either fire workers or maintain the size of their existing teams next year. Only a third indicated they planned to hire." The WSJ adds that pullback from adding manpower could be temporary. But given shareholders' demand for cost-efficiency and the continual improvements in AI, chronic unemployment could become standard. However, there is a solution. An old-fashioned one. That's becoming a solopreneur, that is setting up your own business without partners or employees. The model dates back to ancient times.  The golden age of the solo business owner in America had been from the late 1800s to about the mid 1920s.  There had been a wave of immigrants, discrimination against them and few jobs. They drove pushcarts ...
Read more

Newly Minted PhDs in Economics Face Unwelcoming Job Market: Of Course, I Left My PhD in Humanities Off the Resume

Monitor postings on Reddit subunits focused on careers and it's no longer news that PhDs, both newly minted and those already in the labor market, generally are finding the credential an obstacle in the search for a job or even contract assignments. No, not an asset.  Let's cut to the chase. The highly educated have to get smart about this, fast. With some exceptions, I advise those I coach to leave the PhD off job-search materials. The negative assumptions among those hiring range from that you expect too much money to you'll be a know-it-all.  When my boutique collapsed post-9/11 and I had to land a survival job I lopped off everything but the BA. At the interview I dumbed-down my vocabulary. Sure Harvard was started in 1636 but America remains anti-intellectual. In addition, the integration of AI into strategy and operations makes knowledge work in general less and less marketable.  That's the narrative of our times: Advanced degrees having low or no ROI. The result,...
Read more

Harvard and Grades: Leveling the Playing Field

  Today, faculty at Harvard vote on the issue of limiting "A" grades.  The perception has been that too many of those have been handed out but not earned.  It's common for Harvard College graduates to go after jobs in finance and consulting and apply to top law schools. Those require high grades. That's the first cut. Without those grades the edge of the investment of a Harvard education could be diminished. Hell, you could have gone to a state school. Obviously students oppose limiting the number of "A" grades. The playing field on which they compete for a future could be made more level. Earning a Good Living in 2026 Involves Mental Combat. The enemy is usually your own thinking. Complimentary consultation. No Pressure. Solid Guidance. Contact Jane Genova janegenova374@gmail.com.
Read more