is it OK to ask my team to do working lunches?

by Alison Green on October 29, 2024

A reader writes:

I have a question about working lunches. I manage a small team, and I recently held a brainstorming session for some professional development ideas for next year that the whole team can participate in. One of the options I suggested is (company-sponsored) lunch and learns, where we watch a work-related webinar and debrief, invite an expert to present on a relevant topic, or have a team member present on a special skill. These are pretty common at many corporations, and I was thinking maybe quarterly at most. One of my employees (who is new to the industry and has been here about a year) said, “I don’t want lunch and learns. I get paid to work eight hours a day, so why would I work nine?” I found this so very off-putting. But I need a sanity check.

I don’t particularly want to work nine hours a day either (or eight, or seven…). But we’re salaried, and I think company-provided working lunches are pretty common in this type of work. I’m not attached to the idea and will scrap it if no one wants to do it; I just want to know if I’m off-base by being so annoyed at that response. This employee has expressed aspirations of taking on more responsibility and being promoted, but I didn’t get promoted by expressing opinions like that (and this isn’t a generational conflict — we’re the same age). Is this something I need to address, or is this just the prevalent mentality that I need to get over as a manager?

It’s true that lunch-and-learns and other working lunches are very common; you’re not coming up with an odd or outrageous idea.

It’s also true that they encroach on time that would otherwise be employees’ own, and people aren’t wrong to dislike them for that reason. If your team doesn’t currently have a culture of doing working lunches, adding them in is going to frustrate some people (especially people who use lunch to decompress and not be “on,” or to handle errands or personal calls, and so forth).

Moreover, if watching work-related webinars or listening to experts present serves a business need that you want people to prioritize, why does it have to happen over lunch rather than during regular work time? Carve out real work time for it if it’s important. And if it’s not important enough for that, maybe it’s not important enough to expect people to give up a lunch break for.

And again, I know it’s the norm in some fields. But since it’s not currently the norm on your team, why add it in when you don’t have to?

All that said, “I get paid to work eight hours a day, so why would I work nine?” isn’t the way being salaried works in a lot of fields, and if you see other signs that your employee is bringing that mentality to the job in ways that will cause problems, that’s worth addressing — if only to clarify what they can expect in your field.

But I would also be wary of thinking “I didn’t get promoted by expressing opinions like that” — because the culture is changing around this kind of thing, and that’s a good thing and we should welcome it. If you can point to specific ways that mindset will be a problem in your field — like, for example, that people sometimes need to respond to client needs outside of business hours — you should. But if you’re just bristling at the sentiment on principle, challenge yourself on that and ask if it’s genuinely wrong or just different than how you’re used to thinking.

A note: I expect to see a lot of “lunch-and-learns are an inappropriate encroachment; never do them” in the comment section. But they’re a very common thing in many fields, and it’s naive to pretend they’re not. Still, though, it sounds like they’re not currently the norm for your team, and there’s no pressing need to change that.

You may also like:
{ 516 comments }

{ 516 comments… read them below }

  1. The Original K.*

    I generally feel better about lunch and learns if my employer provides lunch. That makes it feel more like a special occasion and less like a meeting.

    1. Eldritch Office Worker*

      Agreed. I don’t find them all that egregious, but if you expect me to work through lunch, you’re feeding me.

      1. The Rural Juror*

        We have them all the time for training (several a month, for licenses different folks maintain). Lunch is always provided! I just think of it as not having to make or buy my lunch that day. And I can usually skip about 30 minutes early that afternoon (if I get all my regular tasks finished).

      2. Momma Bear*

        We have the rule that if you schedule a meeting over lunch it 1. better be Important and 2. you need to provide food. When I think of Lunch and Learn, I think of them as optional and people bring their lunch and eat while the discussion is had. If it’s mandatory, that will cause resentment. Sometimes programs like this offer continuing education credits for those who are looking for them, or they fulfill some kind of mandated training requirement. I think that would be an incentive and add value.

        That said, I think lunch meetings should be kept to a minimum, same as late Friday afternoons or before the usual working hours of the team. I’ll come in and stay late sometimes, but if someone starts scheduling a 7 AM standup when my clock starts at 8, I’m going to push back.

        1. Ellie*

          We have lunch and learns all the time. I love them – you break up the day with something useful, and lunch is the best time for making sure that everyone has the spot on their calendar free (I’m often in all-day meetings so lunch is almost the only time I have for learning opportunities).

          I don’t understand why OP’s employee seems to think that they’re unpaid though. For me, that’s always been work time. You treat the day/hours as if you did not take a lunch break. That means you can leave early, arrive late, or take a break at another time. I’ve worked at multiple companies and that’s always the way its been treated.

          1. Nebula*

            If it is the case that people can leave early if they’ve been working over lunch, then LW needs to explicit about that. From what they said in the letter though, I don’t think that’s the case, I think they’re expecting that people will work a normal length day with the lunch and learn treated as their lunch break.

            1. AnotherOne*

              I think it’s cuz they’re salaried. Whether I work 7 hours a day or 9 hours a day, I get paid the same.

              That said- I’ve heard of places where after a lunch and learn type meeting, it is still understood that people can take an hour if they need to run errands during “lunch.”

              I also think that ideally you try to get a decent lunch. My office has taken to ordering lunch from various places around town v. just ordering in sandwiches. Everyone gets to pick a specific thing, they make sure there is something for everyone. And if someone requires something like a kosher meal from someplace else that just gets picked up separately.

              1. Baunilha*

                Same here: company pays for lunch, and we get to take another break once everything is done. (Or we leave a little earlier)

        2. LL*

          Same. My company has only ever had optional lunch and learns. I’d be annoyed if they were mandatory.

      3. jy3*

        My leaning has always been “if someone requires you to be away from home during a mealtime, for any reason, they owe you a meal at their own expense,” but I’m aware that’s somehow not the norm.

    2. Antilles*

      This. The free lunch really helps remove the sting. And don’t just always get generic-ass sandwiches every time, spend the extra couple bucks to get some decent food and some variety in there.

          2. ReallyBadPerson*

            Wait, all this time, I thought Hawaiian rolls *were* the cheap-ass rolls! And I also thought, sign me up!

      2. Katie*

        I have the same sentiment about sandwiches! Except the last time working lunches occurred that weren’t sandwiches, they provided really terrible food. It was too the point the head of our office, took that vendor off our list…

        1. RC*

          It is an additional peeve of mine that whenever there’s sandwiches, seemingly 80% of the time the vegetarian option is a wrap, instead of a sandwich. And I hate wraps for reasons I probably can’t justify other than I just do (they’re cold, they’re seemingly always soggy, it’s like a burrito but just sadder).

          But yes, IF it’s a mandatory lunch meeting, provide the lunch and make it a good one.

          1. babyporkypine*

            I’m with you on the veggie wraps! I think my complaint is that it feels like diet food. Also came here to add that knowing and providing for your employees’ dietary restrictions is an important part of this – it’s dismaying when there’s nothing for dietary restrictions, or when the dietary restriction alternative is much smaller than the regular meal (I’m vegan, not a mouse!).

            1. MigraineMonth*

              I’m vegan, not a mouse!

              Definitely feel you on that one! It’s especially depressing when you get the exact same meat-based meal without the meat. Chicken breast served on a leaf of lettuce with a side Caesar salad is a meal. A single leaf of lettuce with a side of more lettuce with croutons is not.

              1. Deb*

                But we’re vegan which means we hate foot and can survive on lettuce and air!

                It’s even worse for those of us who are both gluten-free and vegan. For lunches, we can’t have the wrap so we are supposed to be happy with the unripe melon slices on the fruit tray, the shriveled carrot and celery sticks, and the leaf of lettuce and tomato slice.

                Yes, I always bring my own food.

            2. Gatomon*

              I’m so tired of fighting for dietary needs. My immediate boss is good about including me when our department is in charge of the offerings, but when the C-suite decides to feed the whole company, it’s super frustrating. There’s zero ask about dietary needs and often zero information given about what will be served so I can at least plan accordingly.

              I don’t attend these events unless forced anymore after I tried to at least find out what “breakfast” entailed once. The response from HR was pretty snotty and didn’t show any interest in accommodating anyone who’s left out. Showing up for an appreciation breakfast where all I can eat is some sliced fruit while everyone else gets a full, hearty meal doesn’t make me feel appreciated.

              1. lanfy*

                I still remember with bitterness the time my workplace provided breakfast; and the options were a bacon roll or a sausage roll.

                The admin who’d ordered just confirmed to me that there were no vegetarian options and got on with her day. I got so hungry.

              1. Reluctant Mezzo*

                This column is why I made sure there was a vegetarian/gluten free option for both main dish and a gluten free dessert for a banquet I organized. And emphasized that the people who needed both got first pick. Both options were cleaned when we still had regular lasagna left over, so apparently *somebody* liked them. )

          2. Guacamole Bob*

            They are always soggy! And I like many roasted veggies, but cold roasted eggplant and portobello mushrooms are prone to sliminess and do not make for a delicious lunch.

            1. Spacewoman Spiff*

              Hahaha, yes, WHY are caterers so fond of these sandwiches of slippery, squeaky eggplant? At this point, I honestly bring a secondary lunch in when I have a Lunch & Learn, in case the sad eggplant wrap is my only (very low-calorie!!! and not filling!) option.

              That said, there’s one group that does lunch events that has such fantastic catering that I make a point of attending whenever I can, and have lured coworkers with me on the promise of this incredible sandwich spread (with multiple vegetarian options–truly the dream).

              1. Flor*

                I’m convinced they all think that we wish we were eating meat, so they pick all the “meaty” vegetables like aubergine and portobello mushrooms (and, more recently, the fake meat that gives me horribly painful stomach aches) so we can pretend we’re eating meat just like everyone else.

                1. Jenesis*

                  I think you may have just hit on why eggplant and mushrooms are two of the (few) vegetables that I do not like and will not eat! They simply don’t taste like vegetables “should” taste to me. And it frustrates me to no end when restaurants insist on putting one or the other in all of their plant-based offerings.

              2. Ana Maus*

                I think it’s because veggies aren’t necessarily of uniform shape and thickness and slide out of sandiwch bread or rolls.

                1. WishIWasATimeTraveller*

                  I read that as “because vegetarians aren’t…” and the last part of that sentence was somewhat startling!

              3. Nonanon*

                And it’s not even like they’re cooked right in the first place, it’s just roasted veg with MAYBE a bit of salt IF YOU’RE LUCKY.
                Most vegetables can handle other seasonings and/or cooking methods. I know, SHOCKING.

            2. WheresMyPen*

              I’m vegetarian and hate mushrooms. Not a winning combination since 85% of vegetarian dishes everywhere are mushroom-based :(

              1. lanfy*

                That is actually why it took me ten years to go vegetarian after I first wanted to. Then one day I just stopped hating mushrooms (I don’t think I’m tasting one of the compounds in them anymore), and immediately went veggie.

          3. many bells down*

            For some reason people always like to put some kind of cream cheese in a wrap and I loathe cream cheese.

          4. wrap me up baby*

            God, I love a wrap. like to me everything is better wrapped in a tortilla. It’s not even diet, because most tortillas have a higher fat content than bread. But most bread is flavorless and either dry or soggy. Also the ratio to bread to filling is way off in most commercial sandwiches. I’ve never understood a club sandwich, like why would you put even more bread in this thing?

        2. Fishsticks*

          The last time we had a meeting with provided lunch, they got Chik-fil-A in big boxes and then left them sitting on the counter behind us. We weren’t allowed to eat until the halfway point – more than an hour through what was intended to be a 2 hour meeting. The food was lukewarm at best and cold at worst. Cold chicken with cool fries.

          Why not just. Let us eat when the food arrived?

      4. Selina Luna*

        And freaking listen when an employee says they can’t eat something. 3 times, I’ve been asked whether I have food restrictions, 3 times I have said that I can’t eat bell peppers, and 3 times, they’ve served fajitas. Do you know what one ingredient is found in nearly all fajitas? Freaking bell peppers. The name fajita is because the vegetables and meats are cut into strips that resemble sashes, and bell peppers are one of the few vegetables that can be reliably cut into strips (along with onions, which are also nearly always in fajitas). This was with 3 different groups, too!

      5. Wilbur*

        Rotating food options is so critical. My division always uses the contractor that runs the cafeteria because it’s easy, and every single time they pick a BBQ buffet. It’s perfectly fine (Apart from cheap ass rolls and lacking vegetarian options). I would overjoyed for the taco bar, but anything would be a welcome change.

    3. Hlao-roo*

      Yeah, I think there are a few different ways to do lunch and learns:

      1) employees bring their own lunch, lunch-and-learn happens from noon-1pm (or whenever the standard “lunch break” time is)
      2) company pays for lunch, lunch-and-learn happens from noon-1pm (or whenever the standard “lunch break” time is)
      3) company pays for lunch, lunch-and-learn happens on “company time” (from 11am-noon, for example)

      I personally think option (3) is the best. It’s important enough to happen on company time and important enough for the company to provide lunch :)

    4. Just Thinkin' Here*

      Agreed. Either lunch and learns are team building in nature with a free lunch or they are 100% optional based on availability and work priorities.

    5. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      Especially if they are not mandatory or you can come and go. That way if people need time for themselves they can take it. Maybe have it cover only part of the lunch hour.

      1. Sloanicota*

        Yeah, if it’s an opportunity, and you can genuinely keep the expectation down, and you provide food, that’s pretty hard to object to, IMO. But it’s also still probably a pretty low value-ad thing for OP to spend a lot of time on. But if it’s easy to do, sure!

    6. Great Frogs of Literature*

      Also, if I am in a work meeting over lunch, even if I get to eat, I will often try to take that break elsewhere, or nip out a little early if I can. I figure that if my workday is 9-5:30 with an unpaid lunch, it should be 9-5 if I’m doing work tasks the whole time.

      (That said, when we had team lunches once a week that were mostly social time and often longer than half an hour, I usually figured that that all came out in the wash and worked my normal hours.)

      1. Just Another Cog*

        I’m in this camp – if we had a lunch and learn over the lunch hour, then I took my personal time afterwards. If I needed to do outside errands, then I’d go do them. When I was a manager, I used to feel the same way OP does about making your employees do work stuff on their personal time, but companies are already getting more and more work out of fewer employees. Unless OP is willing to make that hour a paid one, then why should their employees sacrifice their unpaid personal time to do work tasks?

        1. Ally McBeal*

          Yep. I’m salaried and in an industry that bills in 15-minute increments, so I have to track my time/activities all day every day. If we have a lunch & learn, I’m taking my hour-long lunch break right afterward or I’m leaving an hour early.

    7. Jaydee*

      I think the employer should either provide lunch or the lunch-and-learns should be truly optional or employees should be able to adjust their schedule to accommodate the extra work time. The places I’ve worked wouldn’t be able to provide lunch, either for budget reasons or optics reasons (non-profits and state government). But lunch-and-learns are optional, and quite frankly I don’t think managers would be upset if you attended a lunch-and-learn at noon and then took your lunch break at 1:00 or left a little early that day. The frequency matters too. Ours are usually monthly or quarterly and announced well in advance so it’s not super disruptive if a few people flex their schedules to accommodate it, and there’s plenty of time to plan for them.

    8. ScruffyInternHerder*

      That’s the general rule of thumb in my field – if its lunchtime, the employer provides lunch. It doesn’t matter whether its a lunch and learn, or if we’re crunching through to a hard and fast deadline (as in, this is submitted by 1:30 pm timestamped and if not – every bit of work you’ve all done for the past two weeks is for nothing). We work through lunch, lunch is provided.

      And…prior notice. Its NEVER without at least one business day notice. EVER.

      1. ScruffyInternHerder*

        And I will add, if its more the “crunching to a deadline” thing, there is an office culture of “relax a bit, take a long walk, go sit down and have some coffee…” after said deadlines and working through.

    9. Beth*

      Agreed, especially if it’s a genuinely good lunch. (I don’t have incredibly high standards for that, but a catered lunch from a restaurant feels a lot more special-occasion than a plate of subs!) It’s also important to ask about and genuinely accommodate the whole team’s dietary needs, if you’re going to use lunch to make up for taking away their lunch break.

    10. What_the_What*

      Yes. My former big govt contractor would hold “brown bag” meetings, where we were expected to bring our lunch in and have a working lunch. Multi-billion dollars and you can’t provide 6 or 8 pizzas and a salad? Ugh I hated it, largely because I generally don’t pack a lunch. I like to get out of the office and breathe non-recirculated germy air. But for free food, I’d have been okay with it periodically.

    11. Too Legit To Not Quit*

      Agreed. There’s rarely time to take a true lunch or leave anyway so if I’m working either way feed me and give me a topic that will help my career.

    12. DireRaven*

      This – and provide a (sealed boxed) allergy-friendly, or halal, or kosher, or vegetarian/vegan lunch for those who need it – and give those boxes directly to the employees who need them. Don’t provide a 6-foot ham sandwich sub and nothing else and don’t give us time to go get something to eat (because we thought we were being fed, so didn’t all pack lunch).

    13. JustaTech*

      The one time I had to schedule a meeting over lunch (it was the only time I could get everyone and I really didn’t want to have to do the training 4-5 times) I made sure that everyone got to order the lunch they wanted from the lunch place. (ie, I picked the place but everyone got to choose what they wanted from there, and it’s a place that everyone has expressed enjoyment of in the past.)

    14. Mkitty*

      The Original K, I agree that the employer should provide lunch – that does take some of the annoyance out of losing what would otherwise be time for employees to use as they need.

      But speaking as a salaried employee who was (I’m retired now) always willing to work late when needed, come in early when needed, and even give up time on weekends for events, etc., I hated working lunches. Having time in the middle of the day when I could spend time doing what I wanted – eat lunch, do some shopping, take a walk, run errands – made it possible for me to come back to my desk and work through the end of the day. Being told that I’d have to give that up for a lunch and learn would have annoyed me to no end and I’d have looked for ways to get out of it.

      As Alison says, the LW should consider carefully whether this is something that can be done during the work day rather than take away what may be the only time that employees have to themselves.

    15. Ahoy*

      My work recently restarted a similar program over lunch. It’s even called something like “lunch and learn” except you’re expressly forbidden to bring your lunch. I’m shocked that there’s attendance.

      1. MigraineMonth*

        I was a grad students club president when I was in school, and it seemed like every time we planned an event someone challenged our food budget. Do there really need to be donuts at the club meetings? Are pizzas necessary for the research talks? I had to explain multiple times to professors and administrators that yes, if you wanted grad students to show up to any event, food must be provided. (Preferably sugary, greasy and/or caffeinated.)

        Of course, you still had to chase off the students who weren’t supposed to be there but had hopefully followed you across campus when they saw you carrying boxes of donuts.

        1. Jill Swinburne*

          When I worked for the student union, we achieved quorum for AGMs by supplying a keg – you signed in, you got a free beer.

        2. Snark*

          Many times, I had to be the bouncer when some scruffy geology or math department postgrad tried to sidle into our department meetings to graze.

      2. Retired But Still Herding Cats*

        “…except you’re expressly forbidden to bring your lunch.”

        So do they *provide* lunch? And what about ppl with food allergies (who may have learned the hard way about cross contamination)?

        Or is the whole approach “No lunch for you today”? Or what?

        1. Ahoy*

          Nope. There is no lunch. It’s a work meeting during your lunch break where you’re not allowed to eat. I’ve never been for that reason.

    16. Grenelda Thurber*

      I work in a techy field and almost all the companies I’ve worked for do this. I don’t recall lunch being provided unless it was a mandatory meeting, but *in my limited experience* these are almost never mandatory. Note that the OP states these lunch meetings would be to provide “professional development,” i.e. something that would benefit the employee. Everyone seems to be worried about losing valuable break/free time. It’s a valid concern, but these are salaried employees who can typically take a break when they feel like it. Lunch is mostly a time that most people have free on their calendars. It also sounded to me more like the OP was asking if it’s normal for him to feel put off by his employee’s comment. I would be if it were me, but probably not enough to say anything to them about it. That said, anyone with ambitions to rise in the organization should probably avoid saying such things to their manager. I had a manager friend at a job early in my career who called those things “career-limiting statements.” That always stuck with me. (RIP Kothari)

      1. MigraineMonth*

        It’s a valid concern, but these are salaried employees who can typically take a break when they feel like it.

        I found myself wondering about this part, since LW’s employee seems to think they would have to work 9 hours that day and couldn’t decide to take other time off. If the employee is truly salaried exempt, they shouldn’t be tied to a strict 8-to-6 schedule with only one break.

        I worked at a toxic company that blatantly abused the salaried-exempt system: we were required to travel and work 12-hour shifts several times a year, we were required to stay late during crunch times for mandatory overtime. Yet if we *ever* logged less than 40 hours in a week (yes, the salaried non-billable employees had to log all their time in 15-minute increments), a notification was sent to our managers to counsel us about the consequences of slacking off.

        I had a good friend quit and take a job with a 30% reduction in salary but no overtime; she calculated that it paid her more per-hour than that toxic company. At one point the company lost a class-action lawsuit about misclassifying another role as exempt, and they responded by laying off most of the people in that role so they wouldn’t have to pay overtime going forward.

        1. amoeba*

          Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. Just… count the lunch and learn as work time, problem solved? I’d think that would be a win-win for the employees – you get to leave early (or at your regular time if you usually don’t take a lunch break), you get free food, you learn something. Or, if you need a “real” break without any work, you just take that afterward with a coffee or go for a walk or whatever.
          If it’s only quarterly at a maximum, that shouldn’t cause any kind of large drop in productivity or anything, right?

        2. Grenelda Thurber*

          “At one point the company lost a class-action lawsuit about misclassifying another role as exempt, and they responded by laying off most of the people in that role so they wouldn’t have to pay overtime going forward.”

          I’ve heard of companies that push job classification right to the edge of plausibility, but losing a class-action lawsuit? And then laying most of them off?? I hope they at least had to back-pay for all the free hours of work they swindled their employees out of. That’s just egregious.

          1. Reluctant Mezzo*

            Well, there are people who are pretty open to firing their workers instead of paying overtime, caught on video saying so.

    17. EngineerRN*

      I’ve worked in several different fields, and “lunch & learns” always had the following charachteristics:
      1. They are optional (though sometimes highly encouraged!)
      2. They are relevant to most employees
      – This doesn’t necessarily mean they are work-specific. One manufacturing place I worked at had a series of lunch & learns focused on financial literacy (the good kind, not the “trying to sell you something” kind): basic budgeting, saving for retirement, preparing to buy a house, saving for education, etc. I was very pleasantly surprised, after initially being very skeptical.
      3. Lunch is provided by the employer.

      1. Jillian with a J dammit*

        Same. My old company (I’m retired now) had weekly Lunch and Learns open to all employees that signed up in advance. They were educational, topics were scheduled months in advance, and lunch was provided. Some of the subjects were detailed enough they were spread out over several weeks. Some people signed up often, others never went at all.

    18. Boof*

      Yes – it can be nice if it’s got a professional development component that’s really interesting/helpful/probably had to do it sooner or later anyway + actually providing the lunch makes it win win for a lot of people (interesting, useful, but still passive/different from usual work, + still get lunch) – depends what you do with them though. Definitely nice if it’s not an active engagement activity because that’s probably more of a (mental) burden.

    19. The Other Dawn*

      We have these a few times a year at my company and people like them since they’re getting free food and it’s optional. For non-exempt employees, they just don’t punch out for that hour; they get paid for it. Then they take that break at some other point during the day and punch out. Exempt employees do the same thing, although they don’t punch a time clock.

    20. Melicious*

      I do appreciate the food, but I’d rather still have my lunch break. Having a real BREAK to disconnect from work or take care of personal things is always going to be a preference for some people, even if it means working that extra time later in the day.

    21. Sparkling Stardust*

      I’m a fan of free food so if there is a lunch and learn I don’t mind! Free food, yes, please! Especially if the catering is a variety of yummy meals. I am 100% remote now and that’s one of the things I miss now that I don’t work in an office.

  2. Nicosloanica*

    The employee certainly didn’t express it in a very polished/professional way, but their point is essentially correct. This seems like an idea with fairly low value-add but a definite detraction from the employees so I understand why people weren’t super enthusiastic.

    1. H3llifIknow*

      Mmmm depends. I have to maintain an industry certification by doing at least 40 hours a year of continuing education. These types of opportunities actually work for me and the people in my field. Sometimes it’s hard at the end of the year to find enough qualifying events to make that 40 hour threshold.

      For fields where there aren’t new technologies, emerging threat vectors, etc… to keep up on, maybe it’s not much value added but for a lot of us in the IT field, they can be useful!

      1. i pick first in double jeopardy*

        I want to do a slight pushback on this. You have to maintain an industry certification? I assume that is relevant to your job. Your job should pay for that time. Working over lunch is working for free for your employer.

          1. Fishsticks*

            If in this case the employee who attends the Lunch and Learn can then leave an hour early if their work is otherwise done for the day, then yeah, I don’t see a problem. But I am guessing from the OP’s verbiage (“this kind of attitude isn’t how you get promoted”) that it would NOT be considered paid time as part of the employee’s week.

        2. The Rural Juror*

          In my industry, we keep up with our own licensing. My office reimburses us for them, though. They also facilitate lunch and learns to get our continued education units (CEUs), but the company is not responsible for us to meet the minimum. That’s all on us. We don’t get paid for that time but they do make it easy on us and they usually invite vendors to do them who provide breakfast or lunch (for them, it’s marketing).

        3. +1 for education during mastication*

          I also need to report my continuing education to maintain my certification, if I lose my certification it’s a much bigger deal for me personally than for my employer. I look at it as, my employer is making it a lot easier for me to access continuing education by bringing it to a conference room next to me and providing lunch. This is preferable to me because the alternative is to watch webinars in the evenings, and free continuing education credits are increasingly hard to find, so I’d likely have to pay a fee to do that on top of it being drearier.

        4. H3llifIknow*

          They are paying for it. I’m salaried. I’m not nickel and diming them for 4 lunches a year if they provide me food AND the opportunity for CPEs.

        5. Selina Luna*

          You’re right that your job should pay for that time, but many don’t. I’m a teacher, and while my job does pay for some continuing education/PD hours, it doesn’t pay for all of them. I can find some for free or at least really cheap. This year, I found one that is paying me through a state grant, but often, these are one- to two-hundred-dollar classes that cost us money, AND we do them in our unpaid time. And we have to pay for our licenses and license renewals out of our own pockets, too.

        6. Boof*

          If you are salaried, you are not being paid by the hour – but probably you have to be there during normal working hours or around lunch, and if the lunch is provided, interesting, + checks off necessary certifications that’s pretty win win.

      2. Jake Purralta*

        At my work (IT field) the developers have time carved out of their normal working hours for keeping up with certifications and other learning. We would never expect them to give up their lunch or work over.
        Every company I’ve worked public and private for if you attend a training course/exams you get the time off to attend paid. Why would this be treated different, it’s all training/learning.
        I’m in the UK so maybe that’s the difference?

      3. Dog momma*

        Agree, retired nurse here, not everyone can go to conferences. Lunch and learn was helpful. For critical care nurse certification, ( CCRN) we also needed to maintain a certain# of hours of work time so that was fine if you worked FT ( 40 hrs) over the course of the year. If you were PT, you had to get those extra hours> pick up an occasional extra shift. Working 12 HR shifts helped a lot. And you were paid more for certification/ being on the clinical ladder, so it was worth it.

      4. a clockwork lemon*

        I was just coming to say the same thing. I’ve got 40hrs of continuing education that need to get done on my own time to maintain a professional license. I looooooove lunch & learn sessions because 1) I’m getting fed, and 2) it’s something I’d have to spend a lunch hour doing anyway.

        Nobody in my company at any level below I guess maybe the C-suite would be able to get away with refusing to participate in a quarterly lunch meeting, and it would definitely be A Thing if it was framed as “I’m only paid to work eight hours a day.”

    2. ferrina*

      In my industry, working lunches is extremely common. If you are above a certain level, having a “lunch hour” is sort of a running joke.
      That said, we also have flexible working hours, so no one expects you to be on for 9 hours a day. I regularly work through lunch, then log off a little early. It’s expected that you’ll work more than 8 hr/day during the busy season, but in exchange for that you have flexible hours, flexible working location, and a quite a good paycheck.

    3. Tiger Snake*

      I don’t mind learning lunches. I do mind that I’m not expected to count that as part of my working hours.

      Salaried or not; I am hired to work a set number of hours a week with SOME flexibility either side. A part of that agreement is also specifics around breaks and lunch break. That’s written into federal law for me – after 6 hours, I get at least 30 minutes break. Break. Learning is not break. If you want me to attend work sessions – and learning is by my workplace, for my workplace’s benefit – then it should count as part of my work.

      That’s why when a workplace sends you to an actual course where you’re offline at training for a full day or more, the training has a lunch break too.

      1. allathian*

        Yup. I work for the government in Finland and our collective agreement stipulates a mandatory unpaid lunch break of at least 30 minutes on days when you work at least 6 hours. I have a very flexible work time arrangement, I can take 2 hours in the middle of the day if I want just by noting it on the calendar. My manager trusts me to keep tabs my own workload well enough that I don’t need permission to do so.

        With a former manager we had working lunches that lasted an hour. We’d use 30 minutes company time and 30 minutes unpaid break time for those. We paid for our own food, though.

  3. Too Long Til Retirement*

    “Carve out real work time for it if it’s important. And if it’s not important enough for that, maybe it’s not important.”

    This should be the policy for EVERYTHING having to do with a job, in my opinion.

    1. Sneaky Squirrel*

      This! I see so many companies carve out their DEI events as “optional”. I think that’s a cop out for companies who say it’s one of their values but then don’t make time for their staff to attend any DEI building events.

      1. Nonnynon*

        My workplace (government) claimed that they super cared about DEI and stuff, but then also specifically insisted that our discussion group happen NOT. IN. WORKING. HOURS.

        Yeah that’s not the only issue I’ve had with that particular higher-up…

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Yeah, I started to believe my organization actually cared about their DEI initiative when they had me take the training (4 full days) during work time. Particularly since I was in IT, not the “face” of the company that they really wanted to get trained.

          Yes, the training was optional, but I don’t think that type/intensity of training would have succeeded if there were people there who didn’t want to be.

        2. Wayward Sun*

          Mine decided we should form a DEI committee. Only problem: The people who weren’t minorities felt like it would be appropriation to take that role, and the people who were didn’t want the additional unpaid labor. We were told it would Look Very Bad if the department didn’t form a committee. Still didn’t happen.

      2. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

        Same, we were required to put DEI as a goal but all DEI events are after hours and most staff is hourly and are not approved for overtime

      3. just some guy*

        My “favourite” in this line was when work observed Mental Health Awareness Week by offering a seminar on work-life balance…during lunch hour.

    4. Quinalla*

      Yup, I always try to emphasize this.

      We do have optional lunch & learns (truly optional) where lunch is provided if in person every Thursday (or at least most Thursdays – we skip some). It’s a tradition and a way for people to get continuing education for licensing for some of the lunch & learns and I don’t mind it since it truly is optional.

      If someone wants to schedule anything else over lunch, it better be extremely urgent and hard to schedule with the participants (time zone or lots of folks who are busy). If someone wants to set up a reoccurring meeting at lunch, hard pass. If it is important, it should be during normal work hours unless there is a very good reason (time zone, event that is held at night, etc.)

  4. Snarky Monkey*

    Or make it optional, provide lunch, and sell people on the benefits they’ll receive by opting in (building skills, comaradarie with team, etc.).

    1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

      I wouldn’t make it optional- I’d make it mandatory- but provide the lunch and emphasize the importance of the topic, team-building, etc. I don’t see mandatory lunches 4 times a year as completely off base. And surely they’d be announced far enough in advance that someone could plan around it.

      I’m not in a lot of meetings and don’t get this type of professional development on a regular basis, so it’s bizarre to me that people, especially with more ambition than I (I’m fine with the level of job I’m at; I just like to learn new things and change up my day) would turn down an opportunity to learn new things that might help them.

      1. Ronny*

        Because it’s their lunch break, emphasise on break. It’s not your time to force them to attend something that they don’t see the value in; my previous workplace was a start-up that had a fair number of these “lunch and learn” events, and I attended none of them because none of them had any serious value for me in my role and department.

        1. H3llifIknow*

          But they’re also salaried .. .emphasis on “salaried” so, it can be a lunch and learn, ORRRRR the employer could schedule it for 5pm, make it mandatory “work time” and make people stay later. Once a quarter is not unreasonable to eat an employer provided lunch and maybe learn some new tips, tricks, technologies, etc… *if* there is value added.

          1. L-squared*

            It’s just as easy to make it a “breakfast meeting”, provide donuts and coffee, and do it DURING work time.

            1. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

              I’m salaried. There is nothing sacred about 12-1. It’s during work time! Sure, I take a lunch break most days (never 60 minutes though – I’d much rather leave at a reasonable time) but for me the idea that that particular time is sacred is weird. Just take your break early or late that day, if it’s important to you!

              1. Jane*

                They would not get another break or get to leave early. That’s the whole point. This would take up their break time. Otherwise it would just be “on work time,” not during lunch.

          2. constant_craving*

            Salaried doesn’t really matter. Whether they’re exempt or not does. LW did not include that detail. A lot of people use the terms as interchangeable, but they’re not.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              The way LW used the term implies that they are salaried exempt. Otherwise the company would have to pay the employee for the time spent working and the complaint would make no sense.

              1. constant_craving*

                LW wouldn’t be the first to try to frame a work thing as “not really work so we don’t have to pay you.” The employee’s objection makes it sound pretty possible in this situation.

      2. Annony*

        I don’t see the point in making it mandatory. Nothing should be mandatory that doesn’t actually need to be. If it is important enough to be mandatory, it can be during the work day. I am in a lot of meetings and attend lunch and learns whenever possible because I do find them interesting. But they are never helpful. In my experience, I either already have the information because I need it for my job, I don’t know it and don’t need it or it is covered so superficially that it isn’t helpful. If I were forced to prioritize it when I actually had other things to do I would stop finding lunch and learns interesting and just feel resentment that they feel the need to waste my time.

        1. Rae*

          OP have you had an explicit conversation with your employees about how you expect them to manage their salaried time? That comment about working 8 hours vs 9 hours makes me think not. Do that first, I see that as a bigger problem than the Lunch and Learns.

      3. Irish Teacher.*

        Honestly, I think people need a break. 9 hours straight through is intense. Yeah, it’s very occasional which makes it a bit better but I’d really question whether they couldn’t fit four hour-long sessions in a year into working time. If it’s important enough to make mandatory, it’s important enough to take four hours of the working year for.

        I don’t think this is so much about turning down a chance to learn things as wanting that chance to be during working hours and when you can actually concentrate. Doing it during lunch when people are tired and hungry and trying to eat at the same time and probably hoping it’ll end a little early so they still get SOME break doesn’t seem to me like it would lead to
        people getting the optimal use out of it.

        1. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

          Irish Teacher, spot on, it’s about what is the most effective way to share the learning.

        2. Santiago*

          It depends a lot on your field and how time is allocated. When I worked in teaching, I needed any time “off” I can get during the day. Now that I am in another field, I have only a little time in front of others a day and the expectation that I will take time as need in other parts of the day were, say, my lunch to get blocked.

    2. Jennifer Strange*

      Yep, at my old job we had optional ones (and while the org didn’t provide a lunch, they did provide snacks at least). I didn’t mind that because if folks were interested and felt it could benefit them, they could go.

  5. Kathy*

    Lunch and learns should always be optional. Forcing anyone to work off the clock is bad. And I work in an industry where they happen often. And they are optional. Every time.

      1. Elbe*

        Agreed. A lot of companies specifically use lunch and learns for salaried employees because people are more likely to have a mid-day time slot available. In a lot of cases, there’s nothing stopping those employees from taking a break at another point in the day when they have availability.

        1. Annie E. Mouse*

          This is it. My team does lunch and learns about once a month. It needs to be at noon because that’s the only time we can consistently all get away from other meetings.

          On the days that those fall, I find 30 minutes at some other time in the day to walk my dog and get some fresh air.

          1. Elbe*

            This has been my experience, too. A lot of the commenters (and Alison, too) seem to interpret the choice for a lunch meeting as being an indication that the content isn’t important enough for “work hours”, but I think in a lot of cases it’s just a scheduling thing.

            If there’s going to be a quarterly mandatory training, I would much rather it be over lunch, with lunch provided, than at a random time slot during the day that makes me reschedule client meetings.

            1. amoeba*

              A scheduling thing and also, the added benefit of free food for the employees! (Although I’d also go for a “working breakfast” or “working coffee and cake”, haha)

          2. L-squared*

            I find that interesting, because most salaried jobs I’ve had, people kind of took their lunch when it worked for them. I mean it was typically mid day, but some people took it at 11, some at 12:30, etc, so its shocking that “noon” just automatically works for everyone when 1pm wouldn’t.

        2. Perch Cobbler*

          >people are more likely to have a mid-day time slot available.

          The problem is that the time slot is not truly available. It’s set aside to allow the employee to take their break.

          > In a lot of cases, there’s nothing stopping those employees from taking a break at another point in the day when they have availability.

          This depends too much on the work environment and the employee’s own schedule and habits to be reliable. In my workplace it would not be easily possible, and throw the rest of my day into disarray.

          My personal opinion is that lunch-and-learns are too prone to abuse and should be avoided on ethical grounds, and I believe in my jurisdiction would even be considered a form of wage theft (in that the employee is not getting their legally entitled break, even if a meal is provided).
          I would encourage the LW not to introduce the practice.

          1. Elbe*

            I don’t think that lunch and learns are inherently more abusive than any other type of meeting.

            Lunch and learns are typically used for providing information or training to a broad group (a department, a whole team, etc.). Scheduling meetings with a lot of attendees is just logistically more difficult than a 1:1, so it makes sense to schedule it at a time that people are more likely to have free. Lunch is provided so that people aren’t hungry, and then they can just take their break at a later time.

            Clearly, managers should use good judgement about when to schedule them (for example, not the busiest day of the year), and they may not work for industries that require in-person coverage. But it’s uncommon for most salaried people to regularly have such fully packed schedules that they literally can’t take a break at any other time during the day. If that’s the case, the problem isn’t the lunch and learn, it’s that people are over-burdened.

      2. H3llifIknow*

        Exactly. In my field there are so many emerging technologies, tools, etc… that I’d rather do a lunch and learn than trying to learn these things on my own time at home. I’m BUSY during my work day. If the employer provides lunch, I’m happy to attend, get some continuing education credits and learn something new a few times a year. Lunch is not a sacred ritual people!

        1. Caramel & Cheddar*

          The point is that you shouldn’t have to learn those things on your own time at home either, you should be getting to learn them during the workday outside of your lunch hour if they’re important to the actual work you do. “I’m too busy to attend training” is something every trainer has heard roughly a million times, but “make it a lunch and learn” isn’t the solution to people not having time in their day to actually do this training.

          Lunch isn’t a sacred ritual, but it is an important break during the day. There’s a reason lots of places have legally mandated breaks.

          1. H3llifIknow*

            So, people should be paid salaries. But not ever actually put in extra time. Then make them all hourly employees. 4 times a year is not crazy. And as I said, I’m BUSY doing my WORK during the workday but in IT new stuff is always coming along. I’m happy to have the chance to learn it, eat a free meal and get some CPEs.

          1. What_the_What*

            4 times a year, if it is something relevant to YOUR JOB, you can’t FORCE yourself to eat an employer provided lunch and learn something new? Seriously? Especially if you’re salaried? Happy to take time off but god forbid you give an extra hour 4 times a year? I’m so glad I actually LIKE my job and my employer because so many people here seem to hate their jobs and their employers and don’t want to give a plug nickel. That’s very sad.

            1. Tech Industry Refugee*

              Hope that Kool Aid tastes good. I’ve never been to an L&L that was valuable to me.

            2. Tech Industry Refugee*

              Also, you’re surprised that many people commenting on a website called “Ask a Manager” that covers workplace issues DON’T like their jobs?

            3. metadata minion*

              I love my job. I also love my lunch break, and the fact that I’m an hourly employee and so my employer can’t make me work through my lunch hour (or in the rare case that I actually have to, I can take another hour off or leave early or whatever).

            4. Bunch Harmon*

              There are lots of things that people do on their lunch breaks besides eat – take a walk, run errands, decompress, meditate, call their spouse or kids or parents. I frequently catch up on email over my lunch break, so working is not the issue for me. It’s having to spend more time with people on top of working with people the rest of the day. I’m sure this is because I am neurodivergent, but if I have to do a lunch meeting, I spend the rest of the day grumpy and overstimulated and not working up to my usual standard. My days are structured and there is no time for a break in the afternoon. This example used 4 times a year (and many places do it more often), but it really doesn’t matter. My work and home life, not to mention my mental health, should not have to suffer four times a year because my manager can’t prioritize a meeting.

              1. amoeba*

                I mean, for the vast majority of people, their days aren’t so extremely structured that they cannot possibly block half an hour or an hour off in the afternoon four times a year. If that’s the case for you, sure, maybe working lunches are actually a problem, but for most of us, if we need time do personal stuff/decompress etc., we can just do it later in the day.

            5. Vanamonde von Mekkhan*

              Thing is, it is “only 4 times a year” for the employer as well, so it should be easy for the to fit in an hour 4 times a year within the workplace.

              I’m also glad I like my job and employer, because so many employers seem to hate their employees and don’t want to give a plug nickel. That’s very sad.

            1. Tech Industry Refugee*

              No – I need time alone to decompress away from work and colleagues so that I am not grouchy for the remainder of the day. I am certainly not alone in this need.

        3. Annony*

          I think that is why having them but making them optional is good. If they are presenting on something that is relevant for you and could actually help, you would want to go. If it isn’t relevant to you, then you could skip it if you wanted. If people are not going to optional lunch and learns, it probably means that they are not well developed and people find more value is using the time for something else. The only time I have found mandatory to be good is when it really is actually necessary for everyone to attend for compliance reasons such as the yearly safety training I have to go to that reminds me not to drink bleach or stab myself with used needles. It’s pointless but my employer would get in trouble if they couldn’t show that they made me do it.

      3. i pick first in double jeopardy*

        I cannot be the only person here who is salaried, but gets paid overtime if I have to work after my “normal day” ends.

        1. Katrine Fonsmark*

          That’s salaried non-exempt, which I am too, and honestly I think it’s just a fancy way of saying hourly. I’ve honestly never really understood it.

        2. Harried HR*

          You are probably classified as Salaried – Non Exempt meaning you get overtime most Salaried employees are Exempt from being paid Overtime so they get the same weekly paycheck if they work 35 hours / 40 hours or 45 hours.

        3. MigraineMonth*

          I’m salaried exempt, but my union somehow got management to agree to a contract where we’re still paid time-and-a-half for overtime. I love my union.

      4. Sarah With an H*

        Sure, but salaried doesn’t take away the value of having a break and not working 9 hours straight (which no one can do productively anyway). If employees are able to take a (non-lunch) break after the lunch and learn to get out of the office/rest, then I think it’s fine. We have lunch n’learns at my (salaried) job occasionally, but they don’t take the place of an actual break

      5. Lara*

        Eh. Depends on your salary. For me anything under £30k is not ‘work for free’ money. Unless you’re a founder or working for a good cause.

        1. Katrine Fonsmark*

          I understand UK and US salaries are different, but under $39K (which is what your 30k is roughly equivalant to) is “find a new job, STAT” money.

            1. londonedit*

              I’ve survived in London on £30k (thanks, publishing!) My current salary isn’t too much more than that. It’s doable. But yeah, I’m definitely not working beyond my contracted hours unless there’s a dire emergency (and I’m not expected to, either).

      6. MigraineMonth*

        If they’re salaried, then I think they should have the freedom to take their lunch later on the days of the working lunches. Salaried is supposed to mean that they have flexibility in the time they work; it isn’t supposed to mean “you work as much unpaid overtime as we say”.

    2. Caramel & Cheddar*

      This. If it’s important to learn then it’s important enough not to do over the lunch hour, imo.

      The only time I think it’s acceptable is if it’s something truly optional that isn’t expressly related to work, i.e. it’s not PD that you’ll use in your job. The bank that our retirement funds are associated with sometimes sends someone in to do a lunch and learn about portfolio investments or what you need to know before getting your first mortgage, and I think that’s fine. Likewise if someone wanted to do something more hobbyist as a L&L, that would be fine too. No one’s attendance is required, but it’s a nice thing to offer people who are interested.

      1. Kes*

        I agree. If it’s important enough to be mandatory, then you can afford to do it during the work day, not over lunch break. I think it’s fine to run optional lunch and learns over lunch (and to lure people with free food), but lunch break is a break and it’s there for a reason. People need breaks, for many different reasons.

      2. L-squared*

        I’d agree here. I’ve had things like that that are work adjacent, but not directly tied to mey role, and I find that a perfect use of lunch and learn.

    3. PixelatedPurr*

      I’m finding the complete objection to this really weird. Lunch and learn type things have been standard everywhere I’ve worked for the last 20 years.

      Especially with teams spread throughout the US or throughout the world + flexible schedules, finding a time that doesn’t overlap “lunchtime” for some folks is pretty darn hard if not impossible.

      But I also find the idea of salaried folks objecting to working over lunch (with lunch provided) kind of weird. I’m salaried. I don’t even know if my contract states the number of hours I work each week. I work till the work is done. I’ve literally had one job in 25 years that had an official lunch break, unpaid. The rest haven’t cared when I take lunch, if I take lunch, if I run errands mid day, if I go to the gym, etc. As long as I’m not missing important meetings and hitting deadlines…it has literally never come up. I probably average 45-50 hours a week which is standard in my industry and probably a bit low for my level. I worked through lunches a lot previously, but my new position comes with administrative assistant support and my admin has been doing their best to block 30 minutes a day for me to breathe, eat, and go to the bathroom.

      Maybe I’d feel differently if I wasn’t compensated well, but I am. .

      1. Lara*

        Well – precisely. With my current salary I’m fine with working lunches. When I was making £20k and had zero flexibility it was an extreme imposition.

        1. I Have RBF*

          Yeah, the size of the salary makes a difference on how willing I am to work extra and over lunch, as well as how flexible my hours are. In my current job, I’m slightly underpaid, but I am 100% remote, and my hours are very flexible. I do some evening and weekend maintenance work as I’m in IT, but I take my wife to a lot of medical appointments during the week. It works out. I’m not 100% balls to the wall, working 50-plus hours a week, so I can afford to be flexible in my hours and my company is flexible back.

          Other places I’ve worked the flexibility wasn’t there, but the on-call and out of hours demands on my time were. For those, I had to guard my lunch time, because it was the only break I got in a busy office.

      2. Pescadero*

        …and I find the idea of “salaried” to be a scam that never goes both ways equally which should be outlawed.

        1. Insert Clever Name Here*

          You’ll pry my salaried exempt status out of my cold, dead hands because at my company it actually *does* go both ways :)

          I literally have no idea how I would survive at a job that didn’t give me the flexibility that my salaried exempt job gives — either I or my husband would have to quit in order to deal with Life Things that come from having two neuro diverse kids.

      3. Santiago*

        Yes. Also I just leave early when I have to do something over lunch. Like I just walk out an hour early.

      4. dawbs*

        Being well compensated is a lot of it.
        But also, being well compensated means you have work-arounds for a lot of the things that make this really difficult for people who might have a hair less privilege.

        Reasons I might have objected at different times of my career:
        -My schedule for pumping milk
        -having to go home to put the dog out/give the cat a pill/etc (because no, they don’t pay enough to ‘hire a pet sitter’)
        -the walk I’ll get is the only 15 minutes of exercise I’ll get today (because I’m scheduled from 8am to 8pm)
        -I need to call the doctor/dentist/teacher/school/etc (Because, no there isn’t another 15 minutes of uninterrupted time before 5 pm)
        -15 minutes of privacy (because some salaried jobs are guest/coworker facing and time to allow my RBF or to have a good cry about something is needed–first teaching job I worked, someone kinder than me told me that 1-3pm they were a far better teacher when they did not see ANY children during their lunch break, than they had been when they tried to be there for kids during that lunch window)
        -Call my kid who is home alone (because she’s to sick for school but not sick enough for me to take an unpaid day and I need to make sure she didn’t burn down the house)
        -Do homework/study for an exam (because that class meets right after work!)
        -Do work (some salaried jobs have more work than time for work…even when not “working through” lunch, that didn’t mean that I didn’t work at lunch)

        I’m sure there are a ton more reasons, but, honestly, these are th eones I could come up with during 15 minutes that applied to me (knowing I’m fairly privileged) personally, so I”m guessing there’s a whole pile of other ones.

    4. Aerin*

      Exactly. My org hosts loads of lunch and learns! I’ve never attended one in over a decade. Before they might have been able to tempt me with something sufficiently interesting (although I can’t really think of anything short of “come meet your personal hero who does not work in this industry” or “all attendees will get an extra vacation day” that would do it.)

      But now I have stamina and brain fog issues. There is no topic they could present or incentive they could offer that will change the fact that I desperately need that break time to nap, take appointments, or just find a quiet space to zone out. If they tried to make some of these mandatory (without moving my actual lunch to another slot) I would be at HR with a doctor’s note before the end of the day.

  6. meeeeeep*

    Once a quarter is extremely reasonable. I get we all deserve our 1 hour break but sometimes you have to put a little extra effort in to get ahead. 4 hours per year is not going to make or break anyone’s work life balance.

      2. Yorick*

        These people are salaried, so there’s not really a difference in “work time” and “not work time.” You get paid for your work whenever you do it.

        1. ferrina*

          Technically yes, but culturally it does make a difference.

          One thing I’d ask LW- is there a true expectation at the company that “You Must Work 8 hours?” or are employees granted flexibility with their schedule? If the company grants the employee leeway with their schedule, it’s pretty reasonable to expect the employees to grant you a little leeway (for just 4x/year). But if the company has employees take PTO when their doctor’s appointment interrupts work by 30 minutes, it makes sense that the employee would be more protective of their time.

        2. anonymous anteater*

          where I work, all the salaried employees also have a ton of flex in their schedule, and we have probably 10% or so working in other time zones. So if you schedule anything for the default lunchtime, it probably isn’t when half the people would be taking lunch (either due to time zone or personal preference), and there is nothing stopping someone from counting the lunch and learn as work time, and taking a personal break before or after.

    2. Grumpus*

      But the same logic applies in reverse. If it’s only 4 times a year, can they really not make time for it in normal working hours? Why take away everyone’s chance to recharge/do errands/catch up on news when it’s avoidable?

      1. H3llifIknow*

        Four.Times.A.Year.

        Not daily.
        Not weekly.
        Not monthly.
        Not biweekly.
        Not bimonthly.

        Four.Times.A.Year.

        1. Irish Teacher.*

          I know I’m in a very different culture here, but in Ireland, by law, I believe employees must have a minimum of 30 minutes break if they work more than 6 hours. Yeah, 4 times a year isn’t a lot but still working 9 hours without a break on any occasion seems…well, pretty intense. I don’t think 4 times a year is hugely egregious (well, if you are in a country where it doesn’t break any laws), but I still think it’s a bad idea and something that I’d advise against doing.

          1. General von Klinkerhoffen*

            Strongly agree, and there are US states with mandatory break requirements so this isn’t a America v Europe thing.

            Lunch and learn is fine so long as employees get their break. Maybe that means a shorter break in the morning and leaving early, but it’s really important for physical and mental health to disengage from work mode EVERY WORKING DAY.

          2. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

            In the US, labor laws change per state, so it depends wildly. Where I am, there are no mandatory breaks for either salaried or hourly employees, though most employers obviously give breaks. I’m not sure of the legality of lunch and learns for hourly employees, but for salary? Almost universally that would be legal.

            1. Names are Hard*

              You can do a lunch and learn for an hourly employee, but they have to be paid for the hour. So then you are back to either them leaving an hour early, taking lunch before/after the actual lunch and learn, or getting an extra hour pay (which ends up being OT if no other change to a 40 hour schedule).

            2. MigraineMonth*

              A lunch-and-learn for an hourly employee would be considered work time. It would have to be paid, and it would not count toward any state-mandated “break” time.

              A salaried exempt employee generally does not have the same state-mandated breaks, but that is because a salaried exempt role is supposed to have more flexibility than a non-exempt role. If the employee is correct that they are expected to work at least 8am-5pm every day with only a 1-hour break for lunch, that role may not qualify as salaried exempt.

          3. Rebekah*

            When I worked in an industry where most people were salaried and “lunch and learns” were pretty common no one policed breaks/hours as long as you were half way reasonable. So it wasn’t uncommon to work through lunch one day and then take an hour another day, or do a lunch and learn and then spend half an hour scrolling FB with a coffee later in the day.

            The lunch meetings were usually voluntary but typically popular because the food was always employer (or more often vendor) provided and was always way nicer than anything I could afford to buy for lunch as an entry-level employee.

          4. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

            Nobody is saying they can’t take a break! Just that 4 times a year it can’t be during a usual lunch hour if they choose to attend the voluntary lunch and learn.

            I work with a team spanning time zones, so the idea that there’s one single sacred Lunchtime when nothing can be scheduled is odd. I have noon meetings all the time! As long as I have a break sometime between 11:30 and 2, I’m fine.

            1. Ginger Cat Lady*

              I think lots of companies ARE saying that you can’t take a break. They expect that a lunch and learn takes the place of the break and you’re expected to work right through. I’ve had that expectation at two of the three companies I’ve worked for that did lunch and learns.

              1. amoeba*

                Yeah, this sucks, but if you’re the boss, you can also choose to just not handle it that way, right?

          5. littlehope*

            I feel like a lot of people don’t quite get that the point of a lunch break is not just the ‘lunch’ part, it’s also the ‘break’ part. Nine hours work without a break to catch your breath and maybe grab a few minutes alone time feels to me like…a *lot more* than two chunks of eight hours with an hour to breathe in the middle. I know not everyone feels that way, but to me the break is often the difference between being able to get through the day without wanting to hide under the table and…not, and I don’t think I’m that unusual.
            I agree that working lunches etc are a pretty normal thing, to where there’s no point being outraged at the very idea, but I also think humans need breaks.

        2. roann*

          Repeating how many times per year it is over and over doesn’t actually refute the argument people are making here.

        3. kanada*

          You’re right, it seems like the company should be able to find four hours a year to do this during normal business time.

        6. Flor*

          Yep! Only four hours a year should be pretty easy to find out of the ~2000 hours a year that people are working.

          Four times a year is still four times too many for people who have commitments at lunch, like people with caring responsibilities who go home at lunch to feed a family member they care for.

        7. dawbs*

          Surely that cuts both ways?
          The working man can suck it up 4 times a year, sure.

          But 4. Times.A. Year.
          A multibillion dollar company can’t cover people leaving early 4.times.a.year?
          Folks with golden parachutes should be able to sign a credit card receipt and knowing that this will happen between 1 and 1:30 4 times a year, right?
          Starbucks can close for DEI training for a day, but they can cover ordering a pizza for people working through the lunch break 4.times.a.year?

    3. Impending Heat Dome*

      Will people actually GET ahead though? Or will they get the same 3 out of 5 and the same exact raise they always get?

      1. Sarah With an H*

        ^^^This right here. There’s a difference to me between professional development opportunities that are legitimately helpful or on interesting topics and those whose main benefit is that it looks good that a person attended.

      2. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

        Yes, attending lunch and learns seems quite a random way to “get ahead.”

        In places I’ve worked, presenteeism can play a role, but it’s much more about what you achieve, how you behave to colleagues etc.

        Of course, the co-worker in the letter did express her views in a way that would not help announcement. But generally not attending lunch and learns, in a high performer and star colleague, otherwise friendly, engaged, proactive, dedicated, etc… that wouldn’t hold you back unless the workplace was really strange. And nor would attending help you “get ahead” without the other factors.

    4. Fluff*

      The problem is the normalization the nothing work/break boundary. It is like a leak in the dam. If you do not patch it, more leaks will come.

      4 x per year.
      Maybe another important development from another vital department. These are also only 4 x per year with a dinner after work. It is only 4 hours. Compliance thinks this is a great idea and adds a once a year mandatory breakfast training. HR adds a some mandatory videos employees must do – but on their own.

      Without trying we suddenly have 9 hours added under the pretense “not work” when they are work and mandatory. And impact promotion, etc. The mandatory do on your own is nebulous because maybe you can do them during down time at work. But, we all know downtime at work is needed for humans.

      I recommend tracking these. Set YOUR private limit and do a few (what you judge is needed for ‘citizenship’ or appearance) and say no to the rest. I suspect you will quickly find these requests grow.

      1. Ruby*

        This! Once “lunch and learns” become part of the culture, it multiplies. I’m invited to at least 3 every week (most are optional).

  7. IT Relationship Manager*

    I would 100% require that lunch is provided.

    I do personally hate work lunches (especially when they rushed and I don’t even get an hour of the working lunch) because I go home to take of personal matters every day. So when these events come up I have to either leave early before the lunch to take care of it or I have to arrange for others to do it for me. All day meetings with no breaks for lunch are something that I really have to plan ahead for.

    I think if you can hold a meeting outside of the lunch hour, you should.

    I agree more that you are contracted for 8 hours a day and encroaching on lunch is more like asking someone to stay an hour later than not.

    1. Massive Dynamic*

      Came here for this point – just make it a meeting outside of the lunch hour! Then you can also make it mandatory if you’d like.

    2. TQB*

      My office routinely has lunch meetings, lunch provided. But during shutdown, the meetings continued to occur at lunch time, sans food. Then we came back to the office and there’s been a distressing uptick in meetings that fall into the noon hour, with no food. I will tolerate the work lunch if i get free food (or rather, if I’m being paid with food). I have a deep distaste for items that keep appearing on my calendar in the lunch hour and if I can, i decline them!

  8. HugsAreNotTolerated*

    At PreviousJob, Lunch & Learns happened on occasion, and when the employer provides the food and the content is engaging and actually helpful, then yes, the occasional lunch hour being usurped wasn’t that bad. But when the content was an Outlook or Salesforce tutorial? No, thank you. Depending on the workplace Lunch & Learns become an issue when you have people who work different hours. People who work 7-4 may not want to wait until noon, and people who work 10-6 may not be interested in lunch only 2 hours into their work day. If it’s important, make time for it during the other hours of the day.

    1. Richard Hershberger*

      +1000 on the “engaging and actually helpful” part. Taking away an hour of my life for a complete waste of time? feh. Oh, and keep in mind that what constitutes engaging and actually helpful varies from individual to individual, even working on the same team.

      1. JustaTech*

        I’ve had to run a over-lunch meeting: I had to finish up a training and catching everyone around their lab schedules just wasn’t working.

        So I said “I’m ordering lunch from this place, pick what you want” and kept the training under an hour. (It was about 10 people.)
        Honestly most people treated it as a prize for finishing up the training – which was generally useful but also something the VP had gotten very excited about and we were under a lot of pressure to “show progress”.

        But the next one I have to do will just be a 30 minute Teams call, because “free lunch” has diminishing returns (and also is a huge pain in my posterior to set up).

  9. Bananapants*

    Honestly I agree with your employee if they’re just losing their lunch break and can’t make it up earlier or later in the day. I suppose they were a bit blunt but I would have said something similar. My current company does mandatory “lunch-and-learn” type meetings every few weeks, but they keep them to around 30 min., still let us have our usual 1 hour break anyway, and sometimes provide food. It works well.

    1. Lady Danbury*

      My company has a similar approach, though less frequent meetings. We sometimes have meetings over lunch (generally due to scheduling issues if they’re sufficiently important and that’s the only time that works in everyone’s calendar), but the expectation is that people will still take their lunch break before or after the meeting. Their are also optional lunch and learns that may or may not be job related (topics have included wellness, benefits, even social or cultural issues) and those always include food.

    3. IcedOatCappuccino*

      This is the key point! Maybe the workplace isn’t open to offering it, or that maybe the employee can’t or doesn’t know that they can take advantage of – still having that hour to themselves. We often do lunch and learns, with food provided. Then the majority of us will go back to our desks, work for another few hours, then run errands / go on a walk / get a coffee / sit and read / do anything but work for an hour around 2pm. Or some people are allowed to clock off at 4pm. I don’t think its too much to have something more casual yet worth sharing with employees and add the camaraderie of sharing a meal over it, but it needs to be balanced with the other activities one would usually do on a break.

  10. HonorBox*

    I agree with the idea that if it is something valuable and important, there should be a way to specify time for it outside of the lunch hour. While it isn’t impossible to do, being fully engaged with important information while also stuffing a sandwich into your mouth can be difficult. I’d say that if you’ve not done it before, it might be worth holding off and having the meetings during regular hours.

    As for the employee, I’d circle back. Tell them that while their response caught you a little off guard, you recognize that they have valid points. And then do tell them that just because they’re salaried doesn’t mean that all boundaries are off, but there will be times that things will happen outside of “normal” business hours, and part of being salaried means they need to deal with those things. But in this instance, they do bring up valid points.

    1. Retired now*

      Part of my circling back would be to help the employee know that that was not an appropriate way to bring up the objection as well.

  11. MsM*

    Providing lunch does help, but I also think this tends to work best when it is employee-driven: the topics are selected by the group based on things that people have expressed interest in wanting to brush up on, or people present on topics where they’re acknowledged experts and would probably have to do a lot of smaller group trainings otherwise. If you’re doing it just to say that you’re doing it, people get annoyed.

  12. Cody*

    We occasionally had these at my old job. The company paid for food and it was usually an interesting topic.

    As long as you are providing the food and they aren’t super frequent, I think it’s fine. Once a month would be overkill, but once a quarter seems completely reasonable to me. As long as the employees have significant notice.

  13. I should really pick a name*

    I think it’s important to determine how much your team will actually benefit from these sessions.
    It needs to be more than just “other companies have done this”. Are there concrete benefits to your specific team? Are topics that are directly relevant to their jobs being covered? Are they going to actually do anything with what they learn?

    1. Mark This Confidential And Leave It Laying Around*

      Very much this. My company was scheduling way too many brown bags (they never provided even coffee and cookies) on irrelevant crap and making them mandatory. It’s now not mandatory, far less frequent, and an effort is made to present genuinely relevant content.

  14. hereforthecomments*

    We have something similar where I work, but they are optional. It’s usually soft skills, like being a leader, dealing with conflict, etc. I’m a lunch time walker and so I don’t take advantage of these. I would not be happy to have my hour of exercise, fresh air, decompressing taken away even quarterly. It’s hard to find another hour in the day just for myself. The hit to my workplace attitude would not be worth whatever is being learned.

    1. Grumpus*

      Well this is it. Why would you take away your employees’ one break for something that could be done in work hours? You’ll just irritate them.

    2. Merry*

      I also use my work break to exercise in a nearby park, if you told me I had to go to a lunch meeting, I would just take my lunch walk anyway, its for the benefit of everyone around me that I do. I’d *probably* compromise and do it earlier or later so I could do both, but I’m not even swayed by the free food part -if it’s lunch time I’m outside

  15. Some Dude*

    My employer used to do lunch and learns semi-frequently, but they were always optional. I see no sign that this would be optional.

    I’m glad Alison touched on the employee’s comment vs the whole being promoted thing. There’s some weird thinking out there that “going above and beyond” means being the first to show up and the last to leave, sacrificing your free time and energy to work longer hours. I am salaried and I try to work as close to 40 hours a week as I can. Does that mean I’m trying to do the bare minimum and skate by. Heck no! I put my all into what I do and I am often recognized for doing a great job. People can go above and beyond based on what they do, not how much they do.

  16. cottagechick73*

    My company does lunch/learn about twice a year, they provide lunch and its presented by an in-person presenter. And these are typical in my field of planning/engineering as they generally are geared towards a new product coming to the market to meet environmental regulations (think stormwater management) or other regulation/need that governs our projects. And by participating/showing up, we get an opportunity to earn continuing education credits that are required by the state for professional licensure. These sessions are always optional, which I think is key.

  17. E*

    I like professional development, I hate lunch & learns. Too much time gets taken up by the distribution & cleaning up of food. People eating can be noisy and distracting while trying to listen to the seminar. It’s hard to take notes while eating. Trying to find catered food that everyone can eat and doesn’t blow the budget is tricky. If what you are learning is important, just schedule it for a regular meeting time during the work day.

    1. A Book about Metals*

      I think you’re making it sound way more complicated than it is. Figuring out lunch for people once a quarter is very reasonable

      1. The crumb volcano from Engineering*

        Eh, I’m with E on this. Eating lunch together is a casual, chatty social activity; watching a presentation isn’t. They don’t combine well. Every time I’ve attended (or presented at) one of these things I’ve found it awkward and annoying. Why hold them during lunch at all unless the point is to use time the employer considers “free”?

        1. A Book about Metals*

          I just think it’s good to mix things up occasionally and sometimes it can be nice to get everyone together for a free lunch. In my experience as much as people want their own time they also love free food, and a few times per year doesn’t seem like a big imposition

          And yeah if someone doesn’t want to attend or can’t or whatever, no big deal.

          1. The crumb volcano from Engineering*

            Again though… why combine them? You can have team lunches sometimes, and presentations other times. That’s even more mixed up!

          2. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

            We sometimes do a lunch and learn where you watch the presentation/do the “learning.”

            Then you eat and chat, either discussing what you’ve learned or just anything.

            That works well!

        2. Corporate Goth*

          The most effective ones I went to were once a month, where one person in the unit took the month to learn about a topic that we all needed to know about. They would present, after which there would be guided discussion. Everyone was required to present and participate.

          It gave the person presentation practice, extra face time with the bosses, and sparked quite a bit of discussion. They were both educational and good for unit bonding. Bonding doesn’t have to be casual chit chat.

          1. Hell No !!!!*

            This would me my idea of a Nightmare and I would probably be looking for another job, there’s a reason that some people would literally choose Death over Public Speaking !!!!!

            1. Santiago*

              I think corporate goth said that one person would present, and the rest would have a conversation. Not that every person had to present.

              1. allathian*

                I understood it that everyone had to take turns presenting, “Everyone was required to present and participate.”

                Honestly, this would have me looking for another job, too. I can do presentations if I have to, but it’s not an activity I find at all enjoyable. Talking in meetings, or even doing mini presentations of a few minutes that I can do ad hoc about matters I’m the expert on aren’t an issue at all, but big presentations with PowerPoint presentations are something else.

                When’s the presenter supposed to eat the catered lunch? I’d be too anxious before the presentation to even *think* of food. Presenting to a bunch of people who’re eating would likely give me nausea. Afterwards I’d probably still be jangly with nervous energy, and I might be able to eat something then. But an hour or so later, when I’d crash from the nervous high, I’d be absolutely ravenous.

                What’s absolutely certain, though, is that I’d get little useful work done in the morning because I’d be an anxious wreck, and I’d get absolutely nothing useful done for the rest of the day so I might as well go home on sick leave after the presentation. I’m certain this wouldn’t be a productive use of my time.

  18. Knitknitfrog*

    I work in education, so lunchtime is many things, a time to eat, a time to follow up on something that didn’t get done in class, and a time for meetings (sometimes but not weekly) – maybe special seminars or trainings.
    But – and here is a big thing where I live, in the indigenous culture it is not really good to mix food/kai and work/mahi. You can do one first, then the other, sometimes people attend and sit at the back eating and don’t participate until they have eaten – making the two activities separate. No one questions this as we have all come to understand for Māori that mixing the two is very uncomfortable. I think we can all learn from that, there is value in separating food and work – social and work, looking after personal needs and work that is important and universal irregardless of culture – even if you live where kaupapa Māori(māori ways of being and working) is not something that is respected. .

    2. handfulofbees*

      I really like that this is a cultural thing in some places! I can definitely see the value in making sure to keep them separate, and I get where this employee is coming from.

  19. HangingwithMsCooper*

    (I’ll start by saying I WISH this is the way my workplace did lunch and learns..)Why not let folks flex their time that day, so getting paid for 8 hours means working 8 hours? Host the lunch and learn, seminar, whatever and provide lunch, then let those who can flex a hour of their time that day, either coming in late or leaving early.

    1. pally*

      yeah that was my thought: why can’t the lunch-and-learn count as 1 hour of the 8 hours of work for the day?

    2. Brain the Brian*

      My thought exactly. Let folks either take their midday break at another time or arrive late / leave early that day if they want. Or work the extra hour, if they want. This shouldn’t be a big, dramatic Thing™.

  20. I Can't Even*

    If it is SO important that everyone has to attend then it can be done on company time not the employees time as the company will be the one to benefit from what is being learned.

  21. Buffalo*

    Well, I’m mortified.

    At my last job, there’d be regular lunch-and-learns from (say) 12 to 1, and then they’d be over, and then I’d tell my colleagues, “Well, I’m going on lunch!” and I’d go take my usual break from 1 to 2. It was a relaxed enough office that no one ever told me not to do that, but…maybe I misunderstood what a lunch-and-learn was? Maybe I wasn’t supposed to take a second lunch? Maybe that’s why they didn’t renew my contract?

    1. LizW*

      Don’t be, because that is what we do!
      It’s a working hour, we just happened to have food during it.
      It did not mean we lost our lunch break.

    2. Eldritch Office Worker*

      I doubt that’s why they didn’t renew your contract. I think that’s a great way to do it, honestly. I wouldn’t have an issue with an employee still expecting to take a break.

      But they are usually meant to be “during lunch”.

    3. TCO*

      That’s common at my nonprofit. We have a monthly (typically optional but highly encouraged) lunch and learn, but it’s counted as paid work time and we fully respect people taking a break before or after, leaving early, etc. to make up for that. Some people actually bring their meal to the lunch and learn; some don’t.

      I’m generally not a big fan of lunch meetings; I think it’s important to create a culture that allows for real lunch breaks. But once a month isn’t a big deal to me and it works well here.

    4. Lady Danbury*

      That’s been the norm at every office that I’ve worked at where regular lunch and learns was a thing. However, it’s not the norm everywhere, so in future you should observe what others do or just ask someone.

    6. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

      Well, they should have simply given you this feedback rather than not renew your contract!

  22. Fluffy Fish*

    If lunch and learns are truly rare (paid for by the company) and mandatory, just let people flex their time and leave early/come in late.

    Otherwise yes, schedule it like you would a meeting during working hours.

  23. BL*

    We do lunch and learns but they are optional. If you attend, you can expense lunch (if remote) or get lunch brought in if it’s in person. We don’t use the time to do learns that are mandatory to doing your job duties – we use it for guest speakers for DEI, once we did one on effective communication, another on how to process difficult news in the work place, one on benefits available that you might not know of (such as pet coverage and extended leave) etc. I don’t penalize anyone on my team if they don’t want to attend.

  24. Escape from the Bay Area*

    I had an employer that made us work through lunch regularly and Fed Wage and Labor came down on them really hard, so if you do it just make sure you do it by the book. It’s easier with salaried folks I believe.

    1. Bitte Meddler*

      Yep. I worked a job that would normally be classified as salaried in that particular industry but the company made a couple of tweaks and — tada! — hourly.

      BUT… they refused to pay OT. This was enforced by a manager whose sole responsibility was checking what time everyone logged in for the day and then, five minutes before the end of any person’s 8 hours, would physically walk to their desk and tell them to log off.

      They also required monthly Lunch & Learns and would not pay us for them because it wasn’t “work”.

      I started reading AAM during that job and eventually pushed back on the Lunch & Learns. And when my manager told my team to read some business-themed self-improvement book but wouldn’t let us carve out any time when we were clocked in to read it. (“So, if I’m understanding this correctly, you are making reading this book mandatory — a requirement to stay employed — but we’re expected to do it on our own, unpaid time?”)

    2. Ama*

      I thought the lunch and learns at my previous employer were mostly well done (they always provided lunch, they never scheduled them during busy season), but we had a handful of hourly, non-exempt employees and the senior managers always acted so shocked when they were reminded that these employees would be going home early so they wouldn’t incur overtime. I asked my boss point blank when I was managing one of the non-exempt employees if she’d prefer I’d have Jane stay until 5 and get paid an hour of overtime and she said no, but she always got this strange look on her face when I reminded her Jane was going home early because of the lunch and learn.

      I would later realize this was part of a pattern with my boss where if reality didn’t align with how she wanted something to work she’d just ignore the issue unless someone insisted. (This happened with meeting logistics and staffing issues too, not just labor laws.)

  25. Somehow I Manage*

    Oh this brings up a memory from years back. I had someone who I respect connect me with a contact of theirs who wanted to do a lunch and learn for my staff and me. I scheduled it with the contact and everyone showed up in our board room. The contact went through their presentation, answered a couple of questions, and left. And my staff all looked and me and said, “where was lunch in this lunch and learn?” Turns out the contact assumed that asking for a lunch and learn was just them presenting while we all ate our lunches. I went out and grabbed lunch for everyone and brought it back and we all ate and laughed about the situation.

    I did follow up with the person who made the connection and their contact and mentioned that when a vendor offers to do a lunch and learn, the assumption is that they also bring in lunch. Otherwise it is just a meeting…

    1. Cmdrshprd*

      “I did follow up with the person who made the connection and their contact and mentioned that when a vendor offers to do a lunch and learn, the assumption is that they also bring in lunch. Otherwise it is just a meeting…”

      I disagree, (maybe it is a different expectation in your field), but an outside person giving up their time to do a presentation is worth it for you to provide the lunch. They are already doing you a service, I think it is a lot to expect them to also provide lunch for you. I would think the employer (you) would provide the lunch in exchange for the benefit of knowledge the vendor is providing.

      I’ve had vendor just bring/pay for lunch as a sales/good will tactic and they just buy the lunch, other times the provide some type of CLE/presentation for free and the information is the benefit.

      1. Elbe*

        In this case, it sounds like it was the other way around. The vendor contact was the one who requested the meeting, not Somehow I Manage. It sounds like the team was the one giving requested time to the vendor, not that the vendor was doing them a favor. And if that’s the case, then lunch really should have been provided.

        1. Cmdrshprd*

          I guess yeah it depends on what the point of “learning” is.

          In my experience the lunch and learn is about giving the person attending knowledge that will benefit them and help them grow professionally.

          I have had vendors ask to meet to pitch/sell me on their products services and we have met for lunch with them paying, while I guess you could say I am “learning” about their product/services, I wouldn’t call it a lunch and learn.

          I get that in the above scenario the vendor was meeting/talking with OP and the employees as part of a broader sales strategy.

          But if the vendor was teaching something like “advance excel pivot tables” to employees that use excel a lot, and not directly pitching their data analyzing AI/tools/database I can see where the vendor is thinking the benefit to the company is the information training in exchange for facetime with the employees.

    2. Sloanicota*

      I think there’s actually some confusion around this point, TBH. I’ve heard it used as “we’ll present over lunch, you bring your lunches and eat” (as opposed to the comment above where their culture is that it’s rude to eat during the presentations – it’s a relaxation of that, so a more casual thing) – or, “we provide the lunch and the learning.”

    3. Salty Caramel*

      The concept of the vendor coming in to present and provide lunch while doing it is brand new to me. I’ll be interested to hear if this is something more common I just haven’t been exposed to.

      1. Orange You Glad*

        These are very common in my experience. A vendor wants access to the company’s employees to sell them products, they bring in lunch to entice the employees to come to the presentation. We just had one last week where a local bank came in to pitch their products to our staff and we got sandwiches. I now get invited to virtual ones all the time and they send me a $20 grubhub gift card for lunch.

          1. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

            To me, a sales pitch is different from a lunch and learn. It feels a bit dishonest to ask to offer a lunch and learn and then it actually be a sales pitch.

            I wouldn’t have someone do a sales pitch during lunch at all. That’s very much work, if it’s a pitch we’d be interested in, so should be a normal meeting. If you’re not interested, that’s even more of a waste of lunch.

            I don’t think an external person usually provides food for a lunch and learn in any industry I’ve ever been in but I guess it varies!

          2. Wayward Sun*

            It used to work this way at my previous job, then someone found out about it and made them stop. Apparently it violated ethics rules because the lunch could be considered a bribe or kickback.

        2. Salty Caramel*

          Thank you. I think the difference in my experience is I’ve never had a lunch & learn about a product. They’ve all been related to professional development. I’ve been to demonstrations from vendors, but they never provided refreshments of any kind, even when they went from 11:00 to 1:00.

  26. Admin Amber*

    Don’t impose on lunch time. Do these things during the workday. People need thier lunch break to spend how they wish to use it.

  27. ElizabethJane*

    Lunch and Learns feel like thinly veiled forced fun. To me it’s the equivalent of fixing morale issues with a pizza party. Employers want this mandatory training to seem like a fun! positive! experience for you employees, maybe even one they should be grateful for when the reality is most people would just rather not.

    Make it during the work day. Provide coffee/water/soft drinks and pastries or something and call it good.

    1. Richard Hershberger*

      I think it is more the employer wants this mandatory training without it encroaching on the work day. The company would happily put it on Sunday morning, if they thought they could get away with it.

      1. ElizabethJane*

        Oh that’s for sure part of it. But I also think (in general) employers want to pat themselves on the back and say they did a great job making this training fun because it happened during lunch.

    2. Tai*

      I agree. I had a boss who would send us to workshops and upon our return would ask if we had fun and what we ate. This is the kind of manager that doesn’t have work life balance themselves and relies on the job for a personal life.

  28. Pay no attention...*

    Lunch and Learns are extremely common in my org — higher ed — because that is truly just about the only time that various groups of faculty, staff, students, admin, etc. have a break in their set schedule, but if your group is small and has a flexible schedule, then Alison is right, schedule the Learning sessions some time other than lunch.

    1. Nightengale*

      Yes as a doctor working in an outpatient setting, the only time that is usually expected to be patient-free is the noon hour. So that is often the only time I have for meetings, some of which could be considered lunch and learn. Or to come in really really early or stay really really late. Lunch is the best of these options.

      But also I always pack my own lunch and so eating it during a meeting or eating it while filling out patient insurance forms or eating it while taking 10 minutes to browse the internet, it’s the same lunch.

      If I worked in a field where there was a lot of unscheduled time easy to synchronize for an hour meeting here and there, I’d probably feel differently.

  29. CubeFarmer*

    Usually lunch-and-learns have the benefit of a lunch that’s provided for you. “Come have a sandwich and learn about new widgets…”

    Also, if your field offers/needs CE credits, lunch-and-learns usually provide them.

    1. Antilles*

      Yeah, lunch-and-learns are amazing for CE credits. I would much prefer to spend an hour (where I’m already at the office and mentally in “work mode”) at a lunch and learn rather than spending an hour of my evening or weekend going to something to make sure I get my 15 hrs/yr.

      1. CubeFarmer*

        I am all about free CE. I don’t think I’ve paid for any yet this year! There is tons of it out there in my field, and it’s easy to find.

    3. CTT*

      Yeah, I was reading this thinking that the legal industry would collapse without lunch and learn CLEs (just had one today! Good salad with grilled salmon and learning about municipal court, what more could you want!)

  30. I'm just here for the cats!!*

    Sometimes you do have to do these types of meetings over lunch. For example at my work occasionally there is a training that is only available during the lunch hour. (People need to attend live webinar instead of recorded to get credits for their licensure).
    Here are some tips:
    Make lunch enjoyable and get everyone what they want.
    the topic should be something that everyone will enjoy or that they vote on
    Build in breaks before or after so people can still have time to do their own thing. Maybe not a full hour but 20 minutes.
    Being that this is not for credit for anything these lunch and learns should be optional and should be something people can leave early or come in late if they need to.

  31. Track Package*

    I think the key points are ‘quarterly’ and ‘company-sponsored’. That’s sitting through a lecture for free lunch four times a year? For the most part, I totally agree with Alison’s and the employee’s point. If it’s important work information, it should be done during normal work time, but we aren’t talking about a lot of time here. This isn’t consuming all lunch hours forever. It seems like a strong reaction to the total number of hours.

    1. Richard Hershberger*

      Sitting through a lecture for free lunch makes it sound like they are hawking time shares.

  32. Butt in Seat*

    I’m in higher ed, and often times the “lunch hour” is the only reliable time when people from many different departments are available (i.e. no classes are scheduled). The lunch-and-learn events are also optional, as far as I can tell. Any mandatory trainings are arranged separately.

  33. PNut Gallery*

    I work for a global Fortune 500 company. We used to do a lot of lunch and learns and have moved away from them over the past 5 years, and leading up that they were made more and more voluntary and not mandatory.

    Whether or not it’s common in some industries, people are for the most part checked out, waiting for it to be over, and resentful of everything but the free lunch which in many cases didn’t cater to everyone’s dietary needs anyways.

    Best case scenario if you have to do these, do half working hours/half lunch so people still have some free lunch time to get bathroom breaks, walk around, eat if they prefer to eat in peace, run an errand or make a call, clear their head, etc….

  34. Chrysoprase*

    I might have expressed a sentiment very similar, at base, to the employee’s – but I never would have said it like that. I’d have wrapped it in a bunch of professional softening language and made it seem like I was building on/improving the plan – like “hey, great idea! you know what would be an even better idea? Not doing that and doing something else! :)”

    LW, could it be the partly just the sheer uncushioned bluntness of your employee’s response that makes you bristle? Is it in or out of step with the communication style/culture of your workplace? (some places prize and reward bluntness) ((from certain people some of the time, at least)). Maybe their communication style needs some polishing for the sake of their future success – or maybe directness, even slightly abrasive directness, would be considered a positive trait at higher levels, but you’re not used to it from someone in a lower position. Something to think about!

    (I wouldn’t give “communication style” coaching based off this particular incident though, simply because it did annoy you personally. I’d wait and keep an eye on it, and maybe have that conversation at some future point about some other incident).

    1. askalice*

      Myself and another member of my team have misophonia, me mildly, them severely. I can eat with others quote comfortably if we are all eating at the same time. But put someone next to me slurping something (or for them, something crunchy), and I won’t be able to hear anything else in the room.

      I am all for a good pot luck (against the vast numbers of others in the threads the other day!), group food and socialisation is great, but I can’t mix food and concentration.

  35. Smithy*

    I do think that the part about diving into being salaried with this staff member would be a professional development kindness.

    Right now, due to being on a team that’s West Coast, East Coast, Europe, East Africa, by being US East Coast – I regularly get a lot of meetings across the 10am-2pm hours. So, whether it’s doing lunch at an odd time or eating during certain meetings, it’s fairly common and does come with flexibility at other times for taking more of a break during the day. In my case, the international team dynamic is the issue at play. In other jobs, that norm may be set by other standards – and while it’s not about a culture of skipping lunch, but rather as viewing your time or hours at work differently.

    Similarly, it might be helpful to engage more directly with this employee around what they think professional development is, how you and your industry view it, etc. In a lot of our careers professional development is talked about super broadly, and not unpacked as much as with direct reports/individuals as it could be. If you’re in a generalist field, getting period deep dives? If you’re in a specialist field, getting exposure from generalists around topics like public speaking or effective presentations?

    Because while I don’t see this as a reaction to penalize – I do think there are teaching moments here that could benefit both the OP and this staff member. Without making this a case of enthusiastically working over 40 hours a week just because they’re salaried.

  36. Middle Aged Lady*

    Nope. Lunching and learning are 2 different activities. Do not take away people’s lunchtime!

  37. Llellayena*

    As someone who helps organize lunch and learns, I’ve got Opinions on this. Most lunch and learns offer a provided lunch, usually supplied by the presenter. This is basically a sales pitch for them, so they’re trying to be really nice to you. However, even with free food, not everyone wants to sit through a particular session. Either the topic doesn’t specifically interest them or they have something else happening that day over lunch (sometimes it’s the offered lunch itself that makes it a no, I’ve skipped because they brought tacos). If the lunch and learns are truly optional (with no penalty for skipping), then there’s no problem offering them. In that case you’re just bringing available learning to an easier to access spot (your employees could seek out this info online outside of work time if they were so inclined). However, if you’re seeing this as mandatory training that the whole office participates in, discusses afterwards and can affect advancement, have it on paid time. Even if that means it’s still lunch but you can leave early.

    For your field, it seems like this is entirely optional and more like a fun and easy way to learn new techniques or products for your field. In my field, to maintain your professional license you are required to attend a certain number of trainings per year so having a lunch and learn series in the office makes it easy to fulfill this without needing to hunt for outside courses. Even so, it’s still optional for us. We just have to track for ourselves how many we’ve attended. I’ve also organized informational lunches where someone on the office presents (Lessons Learned style presentations are especially well attended, it’s always fun to see photos of construction fails!). In that case, we explicitly state that lunch is NOT provided and to plan to bring your own. For any training that we require attendance at, like code update reviews, either lunch is provided or it’s not during the lunch hour and it is explicitly stated that we’re paid for that time.

    For your “why would I work more than 8 hrs” person, explaining that this is an optional opportunity for personal education and an easy way to keep up to date in your field might convince them to give it a try. If they decide to opt out, oh well. After seeing everyone else sit through a couple, they might join in, especially if the topic is interesting.

  38. Tangerine Thief*

    While I think the employee expressed their opinion in a way that was quite unrefined, the mentality is not necessarily annoying.

    You expect employees to come in and work for eight hours a day – that one hour a day lunch break (or however long they get) is their break to do what they need to do. Asking them to work during that break and do so for the benefit of the company is an imposition. If the request is important enough to ask for people to attend, it is also important enough to do it on company time and with company resources.

    Nickle and diming people on the assertion that ‘you are salaried, it all evens out’ is frustrating to a lot of people because they already give up more time here and there over the year, to get the job done. Saying that they do not get a lunch break, you get to eat lunch and listen to people talk about something that honestly, probably is not that interesting (certainly not on the level that people would voluntarily choose it outside of work), and you can’t leave or scroll your phone or phone your spouse’ is not a treat. Especially if it is a regularly planned thing that they are required to attend or you have expectations of them being there for a number of them over the year.

    > This employee has expressed aspirations of taking on more responsibility and being promoted, but I didn’t get promoted by expressing opinions like that

    Teach them how to express ideas in a more professional and refined way, rather than saying ‘your sentiment is wrong and I take offense to it’. The idea is okay – asking people to do work in their ‘free time’ is not something a company should impose on their staff and certainly not regularly – but not how they expressed it.

  39. Elbe*

    I think that the coworker’s comment rubbed the LW the wrong way because it a) suggests that they think that they have fixed hours, which is not necessarily the case for salaried workers and b) it was a bit too harsh of a reaction to a change that would only affect – at most – four hours a year.

    While the comment did give off an “I won’t budge an inch” energy that isn’t always appropriate for salaried workers, it’s also really hard to gauge tone over a message. If the person is an otherwise good employee, I don’t think it’s a huge deal.

    I agree with Alison that having these sessions on “company time” would be better, but I also agree with the LW that the idea isn’t crazy. Honestly, I don’t think the LW should stress about this one way or another.

    1. Librarian*

      “I didn’t get to where I am today by missing lunch and learn!”
      (Did anybody else get a flashback to CJ in the Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin?)

  40. Seen Too Much*

    We have “lunch & learns” at least monthly. They are voluntary and recorded, so employees can watch them when they have time.

    Since we are across several time zones, they are not, necessarily, scheduled during lunch, and everyone is encouraged to just change their “lunch hour” to accommodate that – with the exception of non-exempt in California, which has very specific requirements for lunch.

    I think if you make them voluntary, instead of mandatory, that may take away some of the pushback. They are very popular at my company.

    1. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

      We have a similar approach and this model works well. We are also an international organisation.

  41. diasporacrew*

    We have these at work but lunch is provided and we get to leave early around 4/4.30. I really like that set up

  42. Anon juuuust in case*

    We have mandatory lunch and learns every month. Except nobody eats during them because it’s thought to be rude to the speaker invited to come talk. So everyone sits listening to everyone else’s stomach growl for an hour.

    1. Anon juuuust in case*

      And to clarify, there’s no food provided. Your lunch is just at 1pm that day, at your desk, eating whatever you brought.

      1. Elbe*

        …I don’t think these are lunch and learns. It just sounds like a meeting that happens to be scheduled at noon.

        1. Flor*

          Yeah, if I have a meeting at noon I take my lunch break at 1ish (I usually take it somewhere around 1-1:30 anyway; any time before 12:30 is early for lunch to me). Though the “at your desk” phrasing makes it sound like at Anon juuuust in case’s workplace, on the days they have these mandatory meetings at noon they aren’t allowed to take a lunch break at 1.

    2. Antilles*

      This is amazing because there’s no way the invited speaker actually cares if people eat because that’s so extremely common at lunch meetings. Frankly, if you asked them, I’m sure they’d just tell you to go ahead, no worries. Or if it’s a vendor, they might even offer to purchase lunch themselves and bring it in because that’s also a common practice.

    3. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

      Oh, also, I hate eating in front of colleagues. I’m a messy eater, I hate trying to concentrate and eat and listen and talk and aaaargggg all at once. And I don’t like unknown food (“lunch provided” could be anything!). So I’ll generally eat separately, even if that’s while I’m working, but meetings + food is just a bit of a nightmare for me personally. (That’s my own issue and I manage it separately but just throwing it out there as an additional stress for some people, and why “lunch provided” isn’t necessarily something that makes it all OK. I like choosing my lunch and managing my own food choices for all sorts of personal reasons.)

  43. Ann O'Nemity*

    My experience with Lunch and Learns is that they are optional, and the lunch is provided to entice attendees.

    If this is required professional development, why not carve out another hour of the day?

  44. Liz the Snackbrarian*

    Food absolutely has to be provided during a lunch and learn if it’s mandatory. I think you also need to be gracious if employees need another 15-20 minutes at another point during the day. At my first job my lunch was used to do things like pick up dry cleaning or drop off my rent check, onw I can’t leave my work place (too much trouble) but as an introvert a chance to sit and recharge with my audiobook helps with burnout.

    1. just some guy*

      Also, shouldn’t need to be said but does: food that everybody is happy to eat. Anything catered is a headache for me because there’s no guarantee that the organiser will have passed on my dietary requirements to the caterer, or that the caterer will have done something about them.

  45. MarthaD*

    While quarterly isn’t bad (as long as the company buys lunch), keep in mind that many people- I’m thinking of most of the women I know- use that time to run errands or otherwise get in some of their home work, so the opportunity cost might be higher than you think.

    1. Flor*

      Plus if people – most often women – have caring responsibilities, they might not be able to sacrifice a lunch break even quarterly. If someone lives with an elderly/disabled relative and feeds them lunch every day on their lunch break, they need to go home *every. day.* if there’s no one else who can do that for them.

      1. Abigail*

        I am a single mother to 2 school aged children.

        Sometimes I cannot use any work hours for life admin. Sometimes anybody who is a caregiver has to do this.

        4 times per year is a reasonable request regardless of caregiving responsibilities.

        1. Flor*

          Feeding someone isn’t the same thing as life admin. You can’t just postpone it to a more convenient time.

          And that’s my broader point. There are a lot of employees, caregivers and not alike, who have things that are most convenient to do at lunch time – run errands, go to the gym, call the doctor’s office – but that they can do after work, skip that day, or do the day before/after. Those people are mildly inconvenienced by missing a lunch break once a quarter.

          But there are others who have non-negotiable commitments on their lunch break, and it’s a much larger disruption to miss even a single lunch hour, particularly if they’re expected to actually skip their break (something that would be illegal where I live, making it not a reasonable request even once a year) rather than shift it an hour.

  46. A Simple Narwhal*

    I asked in the open thread eons ago that if I had a lunchtime meeting during which they provided lunch, was I still allowed to take a lunch break? (Salaried position) And a majority of the responses were that yes, just because they fed me didn’t mean I couldn’t/shouldn’t still take my break.

    I think the same advice would apply here, that the employee should be able to step out for a break after the lunch and learn. I also question if this needs to be a lunch and learn rather than just a regular meeting/training – surely you can carve out an hour of the work day quarterly rather than ask employees to give up their lunch break?

    1. Sloanicota*

      Yeah, if my employer introduced new mandatory lunch work sessions, I’d probably try to at least take a little walk/coffee break around 11 or 3 to get that time “back” and not feel bad about it. Although to be fair, I haven’t worked an office job that had a real lunch in a long time. Most people around here just work through their meal in the hopes of getting home earlier.

  47. Elle kaye*

    Isn’t it also true that “salaried” is not itself an indicator of exempt or not exempt status? I would make the point that, if someone is non exempt and the company insists on their presence working for that hour, isn’t it still… working? This would be a paid hour in this cases. The letter doesn’t specify but I would think it should have an impact on the answer too.

    (For some context, I am a salaried non exempt employee and I frequently make the point that asking us to go over 40 hours = OT costs but people rarely seem to be aware of this classification as something different from hourly or salaried exempt)

    1. SometimesCharlotte*

      I also am salaried, non-exempt. I think it’s fairly unusual, so most people use “salaried” as a synonym for “exempt.”

  48. DramaQ*

    If lunch is provided and paid for it softens the blow but SO FREAKING OFTEN in my case Lunch and Learns have nothing to do with me because the lab is a separate entity from the rest of the university/company. I sit there spending the hour thinking about everything I could be getting done at my actual job. While I may potentially some day a year, 5 years, 10 years down the road need this information odds are pretty slim that it actually benefits me but they would be marketed by management as this big company bonding activity that would help me grow. Really all it did was remind me how separate we were.

    Now on the polar opposite side of that were the lectures I attended while working at the university. They were voluntary so I could pick the ones relevant to me. I still talk about the one I went to about the long term impact/cost of pharmaceutical use. I was expected to attend at least a handful because I was an employee of the university but I wasn’t expected to attend every single one. Plus they were often early in the day so I could attend without disrupting my work.

    If these lunch and learns are something that would either benefit the employees in their current jobs or future interests four a year isn’t exactly an onerous task. If it is just because the idea is other companies do it so we should too because “bonding” I would rethink it. Instead maybe offer seminars where you invite people to speak and it’s voluntary to attend. People who have an interest will attend those that don’t won’t.

    While the employee was rather blunt I agree with them. My lunch hour is my lunch hour it is the only time during the work day I have a moment to get away and breathe to focus for the next half. I do not like it when that is taken away from me UNLESS I have the flexibility to escape later in exchange. Maybe not go on a full hour lunch but if I can get up and go on a walk for 15 minutes without anybody getting on me for being productive I’m willing to eat lunch and listen to a lecture a handful of times a year.

  49. Strive to Excel*

    To me this depends on how much of a stickler your company is at letting employees use the flexibility of their salaried time.

    If it’s the sort of workplace where you are expected to use PTO if you’re going to be gone for a half-hour appointment? Or “salaried” translates to “we’re going to have you work 55 hours a week for part of the year and 40 for the rest of the year”? Yeah, I’m going to be resentful of having to give up an hour of otherwise free time for a lunch and learn. If it’s a workplace where as long as you’re there for about 40 hrs on average, no one fusses at you as to your precise in and out time, and you can run a quick errand if the need arises? Sure, I wouldn’t mind the odd lunch and learn.

    Also, be considerate of how busy your staff are. L&L is more reasonable in the offseason, if you have one, or between projects. Staff swamped with work are not going to appreciate having to carve out an hour of their day.

    Finally, all this assumes you are not dealing with people who have a legally mandated work break. I’m assuming you’re not, but in some places even salaried employees have required break time depending on the location and the nature of the work.

    1. Strive to Excel*

      Oh – and make sure there’s a *reason* to do lunch and learns, don’t do it just because. It’s a bad pick for a team-building activity.

  50. Pam Adams*

    I’m salaried, and often put in extra time. However, my employer only sees the time flexibility as going one way. My staying late/working weekends is fine, my leaving early or making up for a weekend event is not.

    If your company sees flexibility like mine does, don’t be surprised if employees want to stick to the letter of the agreement.

  51. J. Cav*

    In my personal experience, Lunch and Learns are generally optional. If they’re not, then they don’t take place during standard lunch breaks. So, if people take lunch at noon, the LďL might start at 1 or 1:30.

    Lunch is always ALWAYS provided. It encourages people to opt into the session, and it means that employees can walk or read or watch an episode of a TV show on their lunch break and then eat lunch in the L&L.

    There are so many ways to do this well and in a non-intrusive, non-disruptive way. It just takes a little creative thinking.

  52. Corporate Goth*

    I’ve been to numerous lunch and learns and none had free lunch, so once a quarter with free food doesn’t exactly seem onerous.

    Often we did carve out work time but it was “bring your lunch if desired” because that’s when we could get a conference room. There was no set time for lunch, so if you didn’t want to bring your lunch and eat at 11, you could wait until noon and take lunch after. Keeping the meetings about an hour long and flexible really helped.

    As a manager, I also made a point of bringing at least snacks and visibly eating, because apparently some people were afraid to eat until they saw it was okay (that particular team was a little traumatized and cookies went a long way toward getting them to a better place).

  53. Hammish*

    When I attend a meeting during what is generally considered a lunch hour, then I just don’t consider that my lunch break. For me a “working lunch” is a lunch where the company feeds me and I’m expected to work, but I’m still going to find another hour in the day to take a break or even leave early.

  54. Lacey*

    Whenever my previous employers did “lunch & learn” stuff, they bought a nice lunch.
    And… it was paid.

    My current employer doesn’t do that kind of thing, but it’s not uncommon for other types of meal-time networking events to mean that the day ends early.

  55. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

    Some companies do both – Lunch (provided by the company) to encourage participation and ALSO encourage participants to take a real break after to recharge. Ironically today I am doing a workshop over my lunch break- although its zoom, so bringing my own lunch , but will be taking “lunch” break when it is done even if that lunch is starting at 2:30 today

    Working through lunch is becoming less acceptable, even among salaried employees as the benefits of taking actual breaks is more recognized.

    1. Relentlessly Socratic*

      Haha, this is why I never managed to eat lunch when I was on faculty. Teach until noon, meetings, teach until 4, go home, cry. (I had a punishing 4/4 load at the time)

  57. EmmaPoet*

    I’ve had jobs where we brought our own lunch for a lunch-and-learn, but they weren’t mandatory. If they’re going to be mandatory, then lunch should be provided, and participants should get CE credits if you need those in your field. But at the very least, feed them.

  58. GreenDoor*

    If you do hold lunch and learns, please for the love of all that is sacred, make them about things that are actually relevant to your work. Like a training on the new software you’re switching over to. Or a training on how to deal with an uptick of actual problems your office is experiencing. Or customer service training that is tailored to your actual customer base. If I have to give up my lunch hour to listen to another motivational speaker puking out a string of tired cliches…or take yet another personality quiz…or watch a 30 minute PowerPoint on something that could have been a memo I would be mad as heck.

    1. EmmaPoet*

      Agreed. You should still be feeding the attendees either way in my book, but especially so if you’re making me sit through Meyers-Briggs or some other silliness (seriously, I got more out of quizzes in Cosmo than I ever did from being told I’m an INTP.)

  59. Elise*

    I think lunch and learns are appropriate once a quarter (I would hesitate to do them more frequently) as long as the company is providing a lunch and the information is genuinely beneficial/ educational.

  60. LNCPG*

    It’s incredibly normal at my company to have meetings scheduled over lunch (we’re all remote,) so maybe I’m off base here, but once a quarter seems incredibly reasonable to me, especially if the company is providing lunch. I could understand pushing back if it was going to be like a weekly thing, but I’d be annoyed at this employee’s response too given what a minimal ask it is.

    1. allathian*

      Remote makes it easier and less onerous, especially for those people who hate eating in front of others, or eating and doing anything else at the same time.

  61. kanada*

    I think your reaction to his comment is a result of thinking that because you’re all salaried, he should be open to additional hours in the service of getting work done. But on the flip side, I think his (reasonable) expectation is that work weeks over the norm shouldn’t be something explicitly planned for unless there’s no other option. I agree with Allison that it’s reasonable to expect that planned and forseeable work functions like this take place during regular business hours when possible, and if this is really adding value to the company then it’s hard to imagine that your team can’t find four hours a year without them having to give up their lunch breaks.

    1. kanada*

      Also keep in mind that depending on local laws, you may find yourself in legal trouble making this mandatory. In California, for instance, employees are entitled to a 30 minute meal break if their work day is longer than 5 hours, and while they can waive it it’s illegal for the employer to encourage or incentivize doing so.

  62. JustAnotherWorkerBee*

    > I expect to see a lot of “lunch-and-learns are an inappropriate encroachment; never do them” in the comment section. But they’re a very common thing in many fields, and it’s naive to pretend they’re not.

    I’m disappointed to see this statement from you, because even though it may not be your intention, it smacks of the whole “this is the way it’s always been” rhetoric. There are a lot of unhealthy norms that are common in many fields and instead of falling back on “this is common in this field” we should be questioning the validity of every one of them. Every employee should be able to at least take time out of their day to have an uninterrupted lunch to recharge themselves. Working lunches are inapproriate regardless of the field (special siminars excluded), and I would have hoped to see you push back on them.

    1. Hroethvitnir*

      I feel like Alison is fairly clear that she’s not a fan, but it’s best to be realistic.

      Not so much “the LW should force it through because it’s normalised” and more “in practice it’s a cultural norm in a lot of places and being overtly outraged may reflect poorly in you irl”.

    2. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

      To be fair, that’s basically what the rest of Alison’s response to the letter says. This comment is just also acknowledging the reality that lunch and learns *are* are norm so any comments/advice that doesn’t recognise that might be misleading for some people in their work context.

    3. nnn*

      Did you read the full response? It literally says, “If you’re just bristling at the sentiment on principle, challenge yourself on that and ask if it’s genuinely wrong or just different than how you’re used to thinking.”

    1. Anita Brake*

      A few times per year is reasonable if the same amount of time (needed for the meeting) is given to the employee as comp time. I would say that a 15-minute meeting four times per year would be okay, as long as that same grace is given for people who may arrive to work a few minutes late. Expecting the burden of “flexibility” to be totally on the employee is not appropriate.

  64. Tai*

    When I first finished graduate school I worked somewhere that had mandatory lunch meetings. I escaped in 6 months for a union job. I often respond to inquiries outside of normal work hours and give up my lunch time to work with families in need. But a mandatory lunch and learn? Yikes. And this is not generational. I am GenX.

  65. Relentlessly Socratic*

    I absolutely am behind the “I get paid to work 8 hours” statement. If I’m contracted to work a 40 hour week (on salary) and my workload requires an extra push, I’m completely fine with putting in the extra time. Because that’s presumably vital to the job/client/customer.

    However, if I’m salaried and have a full week and have an extra hour of lunch and learn added to my calendar and I’m essentially putting in extra time for bonding or what have you, yeah, I’m going to get a little spicy about that for reasons.

    Not the least of which is that most places use the ‘you’re salaried, so you work until the work is done’ aspect of salaried work, and then turn around and nickle and dime you for leaving early or taking a long lunch when it’s slow (or making you put in a full 40 when the week prior you did sixty…or worked a weekend or did 4 10 hour days in a row or….). It’s fascinating how working more (in the form of unpaid overtime) is professional, but using some flexibility in the other direction leads to the path of no promotions or opportunity.

    Lunch and learns can be great, they should be truly optional, and if they count as time worked, then folks should be able to flex a break, arrive late, or leave early. Mandatory training shouldn’t be a lunch and learn situation, because presumably we want folks to pay attention to the training and absorb the information rather than trying to eat/be tidy/get up and down for the food line, washing hands, etc.

    1. Anita Brake*

      “most places use the ‘you’re salaried, so you work until the work is done’ aspect of salaried work, and then turn around and nickle and dime you for leaving early or taking a long lunch when it’s slow (or making you put in a full 40 when the week prior you did sixty…or worked a weekend or did 4 10 hour days in a row or….). It’s fascinating how working more (in the form of unpaid overtime) is professional, but using some flexibility in the other direction leads to the path of no promotions or opportunity.”

      What Relentlessly Socratic said…this is beautifully explained. Perfect.

  66. Colorado Winters*

    Personally, I think this IS a generational conflict.

    When I got my first job, my dad told me to do whatever they wanted – work whatever hours, not ask for a day off, grind it out. That mentality sticks with you, and there are plenty of people still stuck in that mentality, which I see as a generational thing. You aren’t a better worker because you ground it out and didn’t set boundaries.

    I am thrilled that laying down boundaries has become more prevalent. I don’t care if I’m salaried – when I’m done, I’m done. And if you want me to work through lunch, you’re going to feed me (which always happens in my office, anyway). I’m not working an extra hour and not be fed.

    1. Bast*

      I am not sure if in this particular case it is a generational thing, but *in general* I would agree that there are different norms and standards that seem to be more prevalent in some generations than others. My parents are in their 60s. My father proudly recounted that he had 15 years of “perfect attendance” at his last employer, and had never even taken a single sick day. I can assure you that he got sick during that time and went in anyway. If you called out for anything but a hospital stay, you weren’t “dedicated” enough. I worked for quite a few bosses who believed this same thing. Going in sick is not a badge of honor for most people my age (30s). The general consensus is that if you have sick time and you get sick, use your sick time.

      1. Sloanicota*

        There’s definitely a cultural mindset where you do everything for the company, and in theory they have some kind of equal loyalty, in that they don’t fire you, cut you off health insurance, pay your full retirement plus the needs of your dependents, etc. I guess it was always a bit skewed, but at least there was a sense that it existed as an equal exchange. I would say very few people believe that these days. So now there’s no reason to go much beyond the set rules of the basic bargain … eg, try to do good work today for one day’s worth of wages.

      2. Samwise*

        I’m in my 60s = I’ve worked long enough to know this kind of mindset is craptastic. Inevitably it means flexibility for the employer and nitpicky time compliance required of the employee. If a lunch and learn is mandatory, it’s a meeting = work. If you want me to work more than 8 hours sometimes, sure, but then don’t require me to use my PTO for an occasional hour or so.

  67. Moose*

    This is interesting because at places I’ve worked, “Lunch and learns” were scheduled over a common lunch time (12-1pm or whatever) and had food provided (or sometimes just encouraged us to bring our own food), but did not replace our actual break–we would just take it before or after the meeting. We would still get our time to ourselves for other things, and people would just take walks or grab coffee on their breaks instead. This was both in salaried and hourly positions. If that’s what you’re looking to do, I don’t see a problem–but taking away people’s free time for something that matters to work is a little confusing. I agree with Alison that you can just make it a work meeting.

  68. Immaterial*

    my employer would both provide the lunch and count it as hours worked ( not billable) for the day for this type of thing. Of course, if you’re busy, you still needs to stay until the work is done. But if not, you can take off early because of that hour.

  69. Tech Industry Refugee*

    Ugh, please don’t. I need my lunch to decompress, so that I can get through the rest of the day. I also hate when people talk while eating, and this ALWAYS happens during Lunch n’ Learns. Just choose a different time.

      1. Tech Industry Refugee*

        Completely agree! I am not even client facing anymore, but I will go nuts if I don’t get some kind of physical activity or a mental break halfway through the day.

  70. MaskedMarvel*

    Is aggrieved by false advertising. If you lure me somewhere by promising food, you should provide it.
    “Lunch and Learn” – Food = “Another Meeting”

  71. Seacalliope*

    I worked at an org where lunch and learns did not replace the lunch hour. We were still entitled to an hour break after the lunch and learn ended and the culture was to take it. I feel like that’s a good way to conduct them.

  72. Dom*

    There’s a clear distinction between mandatory training, which would be a big deal to force employees to take part in over lunch (or otherwise outside of regular working hours, like in the evenings/on the weekends) and optional training that both teaches useful skills and sets the employee up for success in the future (whether that’s raises, promotions, or just getting to do more interesting and fulfilling work).

    If you’re requiring employees to attend, it should really be during business hours where possible. For an optional session, if you’re able to run it during business hours that would be better, but a lunchtime session that people can attend (without pressure if they’re unavailable or would prefer not to go) is better than nothing, and it can be hard to get sign-off on running some kinds of training sessions during ‘work time’ from upper management. The talk or training in that case needs to be interesting enough that people want to attend, even if they’re otherwise able to do general lunch things like hang out with friendly coworkers, go out for a meal, or whatever else.

  73. Statler von Waldorf*

    This question is the answer to why I have refused salaried jobs in the past.

    I’d bet good money that this plan would be a complete non-starter in a place where the company had to pay overtime for all of their full-time employees that they wanted to work through their lunch.

    1. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

      Salaried doesn’t need to work that way. With a good employer, the flexibility and good will can go both ways.

  74. Sneaky Squirrel*

    You’re only asking for 4x a year so I think it’s reasonable to expect that staff attend the lunch and learns; but I hope you are also extending flexibility to your staff elsewhere, say if they needed to take off 15 minutes early on occasion to balance out the times that you require your staff work longer than their 8 hour days.

  75. Dances With Yarn*

    I work in academia, so lunch and learns are pretty common – although they are also generally OPTIONAL, and we’re providing our own food. We often call them “brown bag meetings” because you’re expected to bring your lunch if you want to eat during the meeting.

    I am not a fan because frequently these are held in a building across campus from my office, and by the time I walk to that building from mine, and walk back, this alleged hour-long meeting is closer to two, and the walking time is completely unproductive. I feel like I’m just wasting an hour of my day just in travel time across campus.

    We have, since the pandemic, changed MOST of these to Teams or Zoom meetings, because we can do those from our desks (and thus be available for interruptions if something critical comes up). There’s very few things that can’t be shared that way, and I also agree it shouldn’t be during your lunch time unless it’s optional. I have a hard enough time getting a lunch break without having meetings scheduled during traditional lunch hours (I’m just now eating my lunch and it’s after 2 pm, because that’s how my work load is).

  76. Lara*

    It really depends how strict / flexible you are on other things. I’ve had a couple of roles where long hours and strict rules meant my lunchbreak was the only time I could check messages / make phone calls / see a doctor / go to the pharmacy / check emails / put my headphones in / eat / make tea / relax.

    (Not factory, medical or lab work. Just regular office jobs with ‘interesting’ bosses).

    As such I guarded it like a hawk. However if your staff have reasonable flexibility, quarterly isn’t so bad.

  77. tab*

    These were very common at my previous employer, and I HATED them! I used my lunch break to get in a workout or have lunch with a friend. If there is something important for us to attend, the company should pay for it.

  78. Hazel*

    Are meal breaks required anywhere in the USA? In my bit of Canada the employment standards act requires a meal break of 30 minutes after a maximum of 5 hours worked. So you can’t legally be forced to work thorough lunch.

    2. Sneaky Squirrel*

      Generally speaking, no. There aren’t really federal laws for adults to have a break. State laws vary a bit.

    3. McS*

      Salaried workers are generally “exempt” which means those protections don’t apply. It also means they’re professionals who can be trusted to manage their own time towards larger goals, so putting a daily block on their calendar at lunch time should be respected.

  79. i pick first in double jeopardy*

    We have lunch and leanrs! They’re at 2pm, so you can actually take your lunch break, and then get some work done and emails checked, and then see the casual presentation that lets you know how other people are doing a thing, etc. Because lunch and learns have value, but so does actually eating lunch.

    Oh and once I worked admin at a hospital that had “lunch and learn” meetings with catered food and the topic was detailed medical things and I nearly vomited. So there was that. Pick your topics appropriately.

  80. Nomic*

    “Carve out real work time for it if it’s important. And if it’s not important enough for that, maybe it’s not important enough to expect people to give up a lunch break for.”

    Cutting straight to the heart of the matter right there. “My company’s time is much too valuable to waste with a lunch-n-learn, but my employee’s personal time isn’t.”

    1. Lana*

      Yes. At a team lead salary I don’t care about giving up my lunch break. As a junior employee, I *needed* my lunch break, and did not consider my meagre salary compensation for forgoing my legally mandated break.

  81. Mad Scientist*

    Another perspective: I have misophonia, and lunch & learns are torture. They are also very common in my industry, and I have been asked to attend many times. I understand that I probably miss out on some professional development opportunities, team building, or even just face time with my coworkers, but I can get those things in other ways and it simply isn’t worth my sanity to subject myself to eating noises. I used to try. I really did. Now I feel secure in my career enough that I can confidently skip them. I have no issue working more than 8 hours though! I just don’t want to hear people eating while I do it :)

    1. Lana*

      See also people with allergies. I have bad reactions to red meat, sweeteners, dairy and extremely processed carbs. This has been exacerbated by the UK sugar tax, so my choices in most public cafes / pubs are water, black tea or full sugar coke (which my dentist has advised me to avoid).

      And I’m well aware that many of my colleagues think people like me are just being precious (i’m just trying to avoid an asthma attack / expensive cavity reconstruction). Most corporate events make me look weird. I had a very young member of staff (I don’t blame him) harangue me about my drink choices. (I genuinely do not blame him, he’s just unfamiliar with corporate norms and thought he was being friendly).

    2. Bunch Harmon*

      Such a good point. My misophonia is mild, but there’s a pretty good chance someone would make it flare. It’s always the people with bagels!

  82. Bast*

    If my employer provided lunch and did a “lunch and learn” it would soften the blow. I am a person who uses lunch to decompress, read a book, make some personal calls, etc, however, I would not mind giving it up once quarterly as the LW suggested as long as:
    1) Lunch were provided by the company.
    2) The date was announced ahead of time so that if I did have a personal errand or call to make, I could handle it at a different time.
    3. It actually was only quarterly and did not turn into a weekly or monthly thing.

  83. Justme, The OG*

    Low stakes question related to this. About 8 or 9 years ago I was required to do a lunchtime training for my employer. The entire department was there, lunch was served. I was an hourly employee and was expected to claim my lunch time during that hour. That was illegal, right?

    1. Sneaky Squirrel*

      What do you mean by claim it?

      Your manager can expect you to work through lunch. However, that time must be paid.

      Your manager could tell you to make up the hours by taking an hour off elsewhere and that would be legal. However, depending on your state, you may be entitled to overtime if you worked over 8 hours in a single day or over 40 hours in the week.

    2. Statler von Waldorf*

      In my jurisdiction the answer would be yes, assuming you worked at least five hours that day and you were not allowed to leave the premises. In yours? I have no clue.

      If you’re hoping to get an answer to a legal question, the odds of you getting useful information go up dramatically if you include the location in question. Labor laws vary a lot by location. Knowing it was illegal in Canada doesn’t do much for you if it was legal in place it happened.

  84. dude, who moved my cheese?*

    You want to do lunch and learns, but only if people like the idea, but you’re annoyed to hear someone didn’t like it? Your employee is saying they don’t find it a valuable use of their time.

    1. Elbe*

      If the feedback had stopped at “I don’t like this idea” I don’t think that the LW would be writing in.

      The employee said, “I get paid to work eight hours a day, so why would I work nine?” which is pretty out-of-touch for a lot of salaried positions, especially if the employer is decently flexible with schedules.

    2. Lana*

      “Who Moved My Cheese” is fairly neo-liberal propaganda. However I agree that Managers should be responsive to employee feedback.

  85. Irish Teacher.*

    I really don’t see that the employee did anything wrong here. She simply expressed an opinion. As I mentioned above, my opinion here might be biased by the fact that there is a legal right in Ireland to a break of at least 30 minutes if you work more than 6 hours, so her objection would be fairly mild here.

    But she didn’t throw a tantrum or anything. She just said she didn’t want to work more hours than she was paid for. I realise being salaried means you don’t necessarily work 8 hours a day 5 days a week and it’s fine for people to work 48 hours one week and 32 the next. If she regularly works less than 40 hours but complains about doing an extra hour, I could see finding that off-putting but otherwise her comment seems reasonable.

  86. Poorly Attended*

    Our company does “Lunch and Learns” and (slight retch) “Coffee and Comprehends” and (full-bodied retch) “Fireside Chats” without ever providing lunch, coffee or firesides for them. Imposition stopped being the word some time ago.

  87. Orange You Glad*

    Where I work, Lunch and Learns have always been common (we used to do them monthly, now a bit more like quarterly) and pizza was provided, but they are never mandatory. The topics are general professional development type things, so if someone wants to participate and get free pizza, they can. If someone isn’t interested and wants their normal lunch break, they can do that too.

    If you make these mandatory, then you should take employees’ break times into consideration. Can everyone get a free half hour to themselves afterwards? If you are just planning to watch webinars that would be helpful, try them outside of lunch time but still bring the group ttogether.

    As a manager, I always encourage my team to take part in these type of learning sessions (and get that free lunch!) but I also look the other way if they need to take a break afterwards to properly decompress. I’m still getting 8 hours of effort out of then, even if one of those hours was spent on professional development.

  88. Not your typical admin*

    We occasionally have to do working lunches at my workplace. The company always provides lunch, and we got to use that hour as “comp time” and come in later/leave early/ take a long lunch at another time.

  89. Pumpkin215*

    Everyone knows that lunch and learn is all about the food. At a previous job, these would occasionally pop up and were not mandatory. Someone on the team would find out what food was being offered and then people would use that to determine if they were going to attend or not.
    (That might be a good thread topic! Best and worst food offered at work).

    Here me out: Brunch and Learn.

    Hold the meeting in the morning and offer something other than pastries and coffee. Get creative but there are ways. Then, people can still have their lunch and not feel like they gave up their afternoon break.

  90. migrating coconuts*

    Just one more manager type thinking that because they gave up breaks/time off/personal time/work-life balance, you know, BOUNDARIES, that others should too. Just because you’re salaried, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t get real breaks, that you should be forced to give up your breaks, or else you don’t get interesting projects/recognition/promotions. While you’re at it OP, tell them they should work through their sick days, vacations days, etc. if they want to get anywhere.

    1. Elbe*

      This sounds pretty harsh.

      Lunch and learns are often used in environments where employees have a lot of independent meetings. Education and trainings are scheduled over lunch so that the highest number of people can attend, but employees can still take a break at another time that fits their schedule. There’s no indication that the LW intends to force their employees to work straight with no break at all.

      1. migrating coconuts*

        No, there was no comment from OP about “well, you can still take your hour some other time, come in late, leave early, etc”. This was all about how teeth grindingly annoyed she was that an an employee didn’t want to be forced to give up their lunch break. And then her reasoning was that she had to do it to get where she was going, and even though the employee stated they wanted to progress in their career, that she didn’t think she could see that happening because if she had to do it, everyone should have to do it. OP needs an attitude adjustment, or she will find herself falling into being one of “those” managers, who is more interested in being right and punishing her reports instead of making her company a place that treats people right, thus attracting and keeping the high performers.

        2. Elbe*

          I think that you’re misreading this.

          You seem to be reading this as the employee tried to hold to their expected work hours and the LW is seething that they had the gall to maintain boundaries.

          But for most salaried positions, it’s normal to expect work hours to fluctuate and to not be capped at 40 hours. Often, that’s why these positions are salaried in the first place, as opposed to paid hourly. Most salaries start at a higher rate than what the employee would make hourly, specifically because the company is compensating the worker for the flexibility. Four hours a year is minimal and is very in-line with what most salaried employees would expect.

          I think it’s actually the employee that is going again work norms by balking at the mere thought of four extra hours a year. And THAT is what rubbed the LW the wrong way. If the employee is being paid a salary with the expectation that the company will have some flexibility with work hours, refusing to take on even a minor inconvenience absolutely is something that could hold the employee back.

    2. Tech Industry Refugee*

      Yeah, OP is verging on “toxic manager” territory. I hope they can change that path. Work shouldn’t be your whole life, and Gen Z will be the first to put a manager in their place about it.

      1. Elbe*

        “toxic manager territory” and “work shouldn’t be your whole life”… because of four lunch meetings every year? for a salaried worker? Wow, I do not understand this take.

        1. Tech Industry Refugee*

          It’s not about the meetings, it’s about the attitude that someone would have boundaries around their working hours. Salaried workers are still people, y’know. Salary doesn’t = abuse me.

          3. Elbe*

            Once again, this is four hours a year. There is absolutely nothing even remotely abusive about that.

            There’s nothing unreasonable about a salaried worker working an extra hour infrequently. Salaries are designed for that type of flexibility for a lot of reasons. I think it’s incredibly misguided to assume that the LW is abusive or that they don’t value work-life balance because it’s possible that four weeks out of the year will be 41 hours instead of 40.

  91. MKL*

    I try to do “snack and shares” for my team, and do let folks take the time back for lunch if they want (some do, some don’t. Some take a break immediately before or after the working lunch to go for a walk, etc). That said, once a quarter seems reasonable, and I think it’s unlikely that everyone really works exactly 8 hours each day (or at least productively) so I think it would balance out.

  92. Sean*

    Regardless of one’s thoughts on the lunch and learn (tl;dr, if they’re sporadic and useful, then why not?), when you’re salaried, the “I get paid for 8 hours, not 9” attitude doesn’t fly. If I’m your boss and that’s the case, then you’re not cutting out early when it’s slow or showing up late for a doctor’s appointment without making up the time.

    1. Elbe*

      Yeah, some of these comments don’t seem to understand salaried work and the norms that typically go with that.

    2. Scarlet ribbons in her hair*

      I had ten salaried jobs (I’m retired now), and not one of those companies allowed me to leave five minutes early when I really needed to take an earlier bus home, because “the hours were 9:00 to 5:00.” Even if I had arrived before 9:00 AM and started working right away and worked through lunch. Because “the hours were 9:00 to 5:00.” As for showing up late for a doctor’s appointment, that was never allowed to happen, because if I made an appointment for a time during the workday, I had to take the entire day off as PTO. I was not allowed to show up late and make up the time afterwards. So when you say “If I’m your boss and that’s the case, then you’re not cutting out early when it’s slow or showing up late for a doctor’s appointment without making up the time,” my response would be “So what else is new? I get paid for 7 hours, not 8.” Because working from 9:00 to 5:00 means working for 7 hours and getting 1 hour off for lunch.

  93. Ami*

    The employee was a lot more blunt than I would have been, but you were brainstorming, and they provided their honest feedback on one of the proposals. Don’t hold it against them just because you don’t like hearing it. (And don’t assume that the way they provide informal opinions directly to their manager in a small team meeting is the way they always present themself. They might just trust you enough to speak more bluntly on a team issue than they ever would to another manager.) It’s perfectly reasonable to say “The standard expectation is that I’ll work 8 hours a day, and if there’s not a crisis or urgent deadline I don’t want to add an extra hour to it.” You’re suggesting company sponsored professional development, not ways to meet work goals, and honestly, they’re right, it probably should happen on company time.

    That said, this isn’t a perfect world, and a quarterly lunch and learn is not an unreasonable ask. Neither of you are wrong, really. But, since this is elective and it’s supposed to benefit your team, make sure it IS benefitting them. Is it actually teaching them a new skill they want to learn and will be able to use, integrate into their daily tasks, and improve at, or is it just checking a box? I’d be more annoyed about giving up my lunch hour to sit and watch a recorded webinar I could have watched any time, and have a tepid conversation about it with my team, which we will have largely forgotten about by the next day

    If you’re asking them to work over their lunch break, most importantly, make sure you’re providing the lunch. Free food will buy you a lot more enthusiasm, and I consider it the least the business can do for asking me to do work activity during my downtime.

  94. Anonylama*

    I’ve been a leader of exempt and non-exempt employees for many years and here’s how I handle:

    1) Anything (meeting, L&L, etc.) that occurs between 12-1, I buy/expense lunch.
    2) If it’s even vaguely for work, regardless of it it’s mandatory or optional, you are “on the clock”. I even pay my NEs for their time for holiday lunches, etc.
    3) If you are exempt, your work is measured in days not hours so flex as you need.
    4) If you are non-exempt and your role doesn’t require “coverage”, you are welcome to leave an hour early that day, come in late another day that week, whatever.
    5) If your role requires coverage, congrats, you’re getting OT for the day.

    That said, I try to schedule things between the hours of 9-12 and 1-4 whenever possible and on Fridays not after 1, except for with my most senior direct reports who are all highly compensated senior leaders.

  95. McS*

    Being paid for a fixed number of hours is not how being salaried is supposed to work, but OP should interrogate their and the company’s approach too. Are people expected to take PTO or sick time for a doctor’s appointment? Are they expected to be online or on site by your start time even if they don’t have a specific task or meeting and are otherwise meeting goals? If so, you are deciding to count hours and they are just following your lead.

    1. NorthDakotaIsOK*

      Exactly this. I’m exempt but in a role where no flexing of time is allowed. It has gotten to where my flexibility is less than in hourly roles I’ve had and in an environment that exists as if everyone should work 24/7 while (in my opinion) being underpaid in a space that is not work where lives are on the line.

  96. HannahS*

    Medicine has weekly grand rounds, which is equivalent to a lunch and learn. I find it to be encroaching, because the hour is both longer than I would typically take for lunch (so it increases the time pressure on my actual duties) and also makes my only chance to sit down and turn my brain off into another task. But also grand rounds is often very interesting and contributes in a genuine way to professional development. I wish it was tradition to carve time out of the workday to do it. I briefly worked on a team that bought us all lunch, which definitely helped morale.

    My view is, if your work doesn’t have the urgency of hospital medicine or equivalent, wtf are you cutting into people’s lunch for? Happy workers are better workers.

  97. Maple Moose*

    This isn’t applicable to you as you state you and the team are out of scope, however “lunch & learns” held over the noon hour violate my union’s collective bargaining agreement (CBA) in two ways. First it puts us over our 8 hours, therefore we need to be paid for 1 hour of overtime; and secondly my CBA states a one hour break is mandated to break the working day in half.

    Also, personally, I hate lunch and learns as it eats into my downtime that I use to allow my brain to rest, and I nearly always go for a walk at lunch to help my brain and body be ready for the afternoon. I would have a very similar sentiment to your employee and would be voicing my issues with the idea based on the CBA violations (again, not applicable to you).

  98. HB*

    “One of my employees (who is new to the industry and has been here about a year) said, “I don’t want lunch and learns. I get paid to work eight hours a day, so why would I work nine?” I found this so very off-putting. But I need a sanity check.”

    Is it possible that you and your employee simply have a different understanding/expectation of what this looks like in practice? If your employee comes in every day at 8, leaves at 5 and always takes a 1 hour lunch then they would potentially be interpreting the lunch and learn as “losing” that 1 hour (and working a full 9 hours) whereas your expectation could be that by working through lunch, you would be able to leave an hour early.

    I had a friend/coworker who sometimes expressed a similar mentality regarding “hours worked for free” and while sometimes I found it annoying, I recognized that a lot of it stemmed from the fact that she had a very production based mentality (if she was going to work 8 hours a day she was going to Get. Things. Done.) but also we were stupidly underpaid and I think that also affected it. You tend to be bitter about any hint of being asked to do “extra” when you don’t feel like you’re being paid for what you’re already doing. That may or may not be the case with your employee, but people who feel like they’re compensated more than fairly for their work don’t tend to begrudge small asks.

    1. Elbe*

      It does sound like the LW and the employee have a different understanding, but I think that is exactly what is rubbing the LW the wrong way.

      The employee asks “…so why would I work nine?” like it’s a rhetorical question. But the response to that is, when you’re salaried, your employers is allowed to make changes to your work schedule. Even if the LW intends that the lunch-and-learn days would be additional hours (which I don’t think is the case), that’s something that they’re allowed to do and four hours every year is not unreasonable for a salaried position (provided that they have a break during the day).

      Saying “I’d rather not do this” is perfectly reasonable, but it is a bit odd that the employee is balking at the suggestion of this. I think it could be an indication that the employee is misunderstanding what it means to be salaried, and the work norms that come along with that. If they think that they’re entitled to work only 40 hours a week, every week, with no fluctuations, that could be a problem down the road.

  99. BigLawEx*

    This has been palatable for many licensed professionals because some continuing education credits are offered/earned. Since that’s something required anyway and…free lunch…then it’s less annoying.

    I think more than once a quarter, nonvoluntary, is enough, though. For people who have to be on for their work/customer/client facing – this can feel like extra emotional labor….

    Required webinars we watched on our own schedule and discussed at meetings at times other than lunch.

  100. too many dogs*

    We work with the general public from opening to close. I WANT my staff to get away for lunch. They run errands, go for walks, all sorts of stuff, just to clear their heads and decompress. I find that they are refreshed and better ready to deal with the demands of the wide variety of people we deal with all day. If training is that important, we’ll schedule an in-service during working hours.

  101. SometimesCharlotte*

    Anyone doing working lunches should be aware of any state or local laws they could be running afoul. For example, my state has mandatory lunch break requirements that apply to exempt employees as well as non-exempt. A working lunch, even if the food is provided, can violate this requirement in a couple of ways. One being the obvious they worked through lunch and didn’t get a break. The other potential issue is the break needs to begin no later than the beginning of the 5th hour of work. So if someone comes in at 8am and they work through a noon to 1pm lunch, even if they go to lunch at 1pm, they are now after the beginning of their fifth hour. Sure, these employees don’t clock in/out so it’s unlikely to be noticed, but if someone is disgruntled already, they could make it an issue…

  102. Anita Brake*

    As someone who loves her teaching job, and who is also about ready to walk out of here today regarding meetings, I’ll say this: If meetings are important to management, then management needs to acknowledge that the employee attending the meeting is NOT able to do other parts of her job while at the meeting. Thus, it’s possible that some responsibilities need to shift (perhaps even upward?) This seems like a simple concept to master, but you might be surprised.

    If management wants to have meetings during lunch, and employees are expected to pay attention and participate, just realize that then it isn’t actually lunch, it is work time. I know that in order to remain professional and gainfully employed, I need at least a half-hour lunch break, for some “off” time, or “down” time. Instead of making it mandatory, could you offer optional webinars that people could sign up for, if they want the information?

  103. AlabamaAnonymous*

    I have a lunch meetings with my team sometimes.
    I always schedule it well in advance so they can plan.
    I always make it optional — they are not required to participate.
    I always provide lunch for them (their choice).
    I always tell them not to count it as their lunch hour. After the lunch meeting is over, they can still take their regular lunch hour time to go do whatever. (They can even use it to leave early that day). That tends to go over pretty well :-)

  104. Anony-non-non for this one*

    *waving from high-risk-for-dying/being-disabled-from-COVID land*

    Something I haven’t seen mentioned but another part of Team My Lunch is MY LUNCH:

    I refuse to unmask and eat in a shared conference room for lunch-and-learns, two-hour meetings that have morphed into “oh, we’ll order lunch and ‘debrief the meeting’ under the guise of ‘togetherness,” or anything else food-related.

    I leave. Yes, I am salaried. I take my lunch outside if I can, in a separate closed area with an air purifier running if I can’t.

    Given I’ve seen one co-worker almost die of COVID and have to retire as a result (in 2021-22)? Given that by my rough count I have at least four more co-workers experiencing major health problems they didn’t have before catching COVID three, four, some as many as six times?

    Yes, I will absolutely sit there during a “lunch and learn” with my mask on and refuse to eat. Or I will leave afterward and eat elsewhere. Because nobody cares about my health but me and I am guarding it ferociously.

    If we could kill the concept altogether — or make it on WFH days only — I’d be thrilled. A boxed lunch or DoorDash is not worth sacrificing my health for.

    1. Alice*

      100% agree. And BTW the jokes from the people in the nearby cubicles about “bet it’s cold out there” when I’m putting on my coat, gloves, and scarf to eat lunch outside? Not actually funny guys.

    2. Abigail*

      I completely respect your right to make this decision for your health.

      Other people are not wrong to handle COVID risks their own way, though. At this point it is not objectively wrong to have a lunch in a conference room.

      I completely understand you don’t want to participate and you shouldn’t have to. Other people are not reckless for having a different risk analysis than you.

  105. Cinn*

    I had to put my foot down with an OldBoss after Lunch & Learns got introduced at OldJob, he wanted me to present for one and count that as my lunch break. So… when do you want me to eat then?

    But yes, I’m very firmly in camp do not introduce regular work things during break times.

    Also, yes if you’re wanting to get promoted or more responsibility there is expectation you will work more than your scheduled 9-5, however this should be for things that are important and/or time sensitive. Not just a regular occurrence because there’s a culture of it looks good to be the last one to leave each day.

  106. Nom*

    I’m somewhat confused by the letter. Does the person work 8-5 with a one hour lunch break? If so, then they could come in at 9 or leave at 4 on lunch and learn days.

  107. George Sands*

    I’d generally say “lunch will be available and/or you can bring your own lunch if you like.” And let people decide if they want to actually take their lunch hour at a different time (that’s between them and their manager).

  108. WillowSunstar*

    Keep in mind too, if you have employees doing things like Toastmasters to improve their presentation skills, many corporate Toastmasters clubs meet over the lunch hour. Repeatedly having meetings at that time may force them to quit working on their presentation skills, especially if the company is paying for it and won’t pay for an outside the company club.

  109. Festively Dressed Earl*

    Why not do a combination of mandatory and optional lunch-and-learns? Provide lunch for all of them. If an employee goes to an optional session on their own time, find a way to informally give some of the time back, such as letting them leave at 4-4:30 instead of 5. If you hold a mandatory one, make sure it’s truly something everyone needs/wants to learn, and do it on company time. Also, consider a breakfast-and-learn shortly after everyone gets in (so it doesn’t interrupt the flow of their day). Again, paid time, and then your team can internalize what they’ve learned through the day, ask questions, etc.

  110. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

    Sometimes the issue is lack of clarity. Is it a compulsory (or as good as) work meeting, event, or training session? Is it an optional extra which people can join if they find it useful/interesting?

    By making it a lunch and learn (certainly if lunch isn’t provided) you might give some people the impression it’s the latter.

    And if its compulsory, yes, it isn’t surprising that some people would feel a bit miffed at giving up their lunch hour.

    Lunch and learns have been common in my current job and OldJob. Sometimes more on the optional side.

    I sometimes take my lunch separately, not necessarily a whole hour, but I’ll eat a sandwich and read a book for 15 minutes to decompress or whatever. I don’t do this secretly. In CurrentJob the lunch and learns are more optional and no one minds at all. In OldJob I learned eventually that it was a bit frowned upon.

    That is another aspect of this: when it’s theoretically optional but you’re judged if you don’t go. Please, please be honest if it is, in reality, not 100% optional. (If that sounds bad, then consider the reason why.)

    All that said, your colleague’s comment was quite surprising to me and doesn’t give the best impression!

    I’m in England for reference.

    1. Lana*

      YES. As a fellow Brit, we don’t cope well with grey areas. If it’s mandatory to attend – say so. We’re technically a guess culture but only in the upper middle classes. The rest of us rely on “I need you at X” – I think this class nonsense is why the UK has such low social mobility.

      And as someone who is ND – That is genuinely more accessible and inclusive than expecting people to guess. Particularly if someone says “You don’t have to attend, I’ll take them at their word.”

      It has taken a long time to parse out that people will say one thing and mean another. My recent job said “it would be lovely if you could” and it took me 20 years of experience to realise that meant “you need to attend this meeting*.

  111. beautiful, talented, brilliant, powerful musk-ox*

    My last company was really good about offering opportunities to learn more about the industry, broaden skillsets to encourage individual and departmental growth, etc., but the only time we did lunch and learns was for classes that were entirely optional — usually something put on by one of the resource groups. Obviously we sometimes had working lunches because there were times when some of us HAD to meet and everyone’s calendar was full, but I know I always tried my best to make sure that everyone I was meeting with had at least a half an hour during the time our on-site cafeteria was open even while scheduling something over lunch (and if we hadn’t had on-site options, I might have attempted an hour whenever possible).

    I absolutely attended lunch and learns if I was interested in the topic, but I think the key to those were that NOT attending one wasn’t going to affect my ability to do my job or put me behind my teammates. Generally for stuff that was either necessary or very helpful to specific positions was planned during the work day. I think that’s the best way to go about it if it’s possible. I know OP said they were only planning to do them quarterly, but surely an hour a quarter could be used during the work day, right?

  112. Need a Mid-Day Break*

    May people really need a mid-day break to refresh themselves – no to mention needing time to take care of some physical needs (taking care of an injury or medical condition; having a longer time to pump), and mental needs (introverted person needing time purely quite and alone, etc.).

    Cut the time to just be a 30 minute learning presentation, then people can focus and write notes without having to also juggle any food), and then everyone could at least have a 30 minute lunch break.

    Also, if the group who would be learning are both people exempt from overtime laws, and those non-exempt, the organizer of theses needs to plan accordingly: the non-exempt person starts their day one hour later than normal or ends it one hour sooner; or their manager writes to them that one hour of overtime is approved for that day (rules at least in California over 8 hours in a day is overtime).

  113. UrbanCanuck*

    It’s unfair to vilify a generation.

    Where I live, labour laws are firm that all employees, even salaried, are mandated to have a minimum of 30 mins for every 4 hours worked.

    I am salaried elder millenial and do attend lunch and learns but firmly believe they should be voluntary or a result of a critical business need (and lunch provided).

    But this is the norm in my industry.

  114. Pescadero*

    Lunch and learns are both completely normal, and completely inappropriate.

    Being the norm/standard in no way means something is acceptable, just accepted.

  115. Kit Kendrick*

    I completely understand that unpaid mandatory lunch meetings are a common thing in many fields. Classifying jobs that are strictly scheduled as exempt to get out of paying earned overtime is also common in many industries. Just because it is common practice and mostly accepted because they’re deployed on people without the standing to object does not make it ok. I’ve slogged through my share of insipid video lunch-n-learns and even been the trainer at a few. Trust me, a plate of cheap sandwiches and mini bags of chips do not make the people whose time is being stolen resent it any less.

  116. Silicon Valley Girl*

    In a previous job, my team hosted lunch & learns, but they were specifically at “lunch” bec. these were open to the entire company of several hundred people, so anyone who might be available could drop in. Totally optional, & those who found the rotating topics relevant would attend. Lunch was provided for the first 30 to arrive (& this was on the announcement). So it wasn’t an imposition on anyone’s time, it was very much an offer of additional useful info for those who wanted it.

    If it’s professional development for one specific team, there should be a way to incorporate that into the team’s regular work schedule, IMO.

  117. tw1968*

    Q for Alison here: Am I misunderstanding what it means to be salaried? I know some companies take advantage of salaried folks. I always thought salaried meant that you didn’t have to punch a time clock. Maybe you have to put in a bit of extra time now and then when it’s busy…but also when it’s not busy, feel free to leave early on a sunny summer afternoon, etc. etc. But that it shouldn’t be a “license to work you >40 hours a week on a regular basis”?

    2. Mark This Confidential And Leave It Laying Around*

      Where I work, salaried people are essentially on the clock (expected to be on-site during business hours) and work more than 40 hrs a week. Hourly people also work more than 40 hours but are paid overtime. There’s no such thing as not busy times. We are pretty typical for the region (Northeast/NYC).

    3. beautiful, talented, brilliant, powerful musk-ox*

      You’re correct, but also some companies in practice (whether they say it anywhere or not) view being salaried as working a minimum of 40 hours. The company I just left was purchased by one of these (there are many reasons I didn’t stay, but this was certainly one of them). In fact, they consider the flexibility you mentioned a “perk” of working there rather than it just being a given for the majority of salaried positions (the interpretation of this perk seems to be up to individual managers, but every time I’ve heard someone explain what it looks like in practice, they have described the basic flexibility I have had in every salaried position I’ve ever worked). From everything I’ve read and heard, to have a career with this same company, you’re expected to work over 40 hours most weeks. And this is one of the largest companies in the world. I imagine some others also abuse salaried employees similarly.

    4. Elbe*

      Most companies will give rough work estimates when someone is interviewing for a salaried position, and the expectation is that company should stick to reasonable fluctuations around that. For example, if someone says the job usually requires 40-45 hours a week, regularly giving employees work for 55 hours wouldn’t be fair.

      But a lot of salaried positions are expected to have some flexibility. If people can generally get their work done in 40 hours a week, asking them to occasionally stay for 41 is not unreasonable at all.

  118. LoraC*

    I wish we had corporate-sponsored lunch and learns where you can pick up professional development for free and not after hours.

    Right now we already host insurance benefits explanations, women in industry seminars, environmental/recycling workshops, and etc during lunch. I wouldn’t see an issue with adding something more relevant that can help develop you professionally in either.

    1. Lana*

      My previous company’s professional development was always on the clock. Their appreciation of my time and expertise meant that I spent my own time formulating training resources for colleagues.

  119. Samwise*

    Agreed that it’s common. But it’s annoying when you work some place that wants you to use PTO for an occasional longer lunch or a doctors appointment.

    double standard…

  120. Former Retail Lifer*

    I’m salaried. If my employer made me miss my lunch break for a lunch and learn, fine. But being salaried grants me the freedom to dip out an hour early that day.

    1. GoodNPlenty*

      I never had the freedom to leave early (or any autonomy) at any salaried job I had. The flexibility was always just one way.

  121. GoodNPlenty*

    I’m retired but had a lot of employers do lunch and learns. I never liked them. It felt like they were trying to squeeze that much more out of me. I liked to eat lunch on my own and not in a conference room with everyone else. I agree with the idea that if the content is important, it should be offered during regular work hours. The idea that salaried means you own me *is* off-putting.

  122. Young Millennial*

    My thoughts on things like this are if I want my employer to be flexible and roll with my life things, than I need to return the favor. By returning the favor I mean, the occasional lunch and learn, the odd 9pm teams message, maybe working some overtime a couple of times a year. I do those things and I do them gladly (in moderation of course) because sometimes I want to start late for a doctor’s appointment and not use PTO, flex my hours to attend a mid-day event at my kid’s school and work from home unexpectedly because there was a snow storm and I don’t want to shovel my driveway at 5am.

  123. Pikachu*

    I think the employee is spot on. The types of things OP described sound more like development for the team or for the business, not for an individual’s career. I can see why it would feel like “nine hours of work” to have to learn more about someone else’s job, or an expert in a specific field if perhaps your day-to-day job is generally field-agnostic or highly technical or whatever.

    Just because you’re “learning” doesn’t mean you are engaging in meaningful career development that will actually move you forward. I don’t think learning about your coworker’s unique skills qualifies as professional development unless they do the job you want to do in the future.

    A lot of these kinds of things scream “non-promotable tasks” to me too. Sounds like the employee wants promotable tasks and responsibilities, the kinds of things you can put on a resume, not webinars and sandwiches.

    I know if this employee went to OP and said, “what are the top 3 things I can do to best position myself for a promotion?” “Going to lunch and learn!” wouldn’t even make the top 10. Because the chances they will learn specific actionable skills to grow in their role and impact the business bottom line at a 40 minute quarterly lunch and learn designed to be somewhat interesting for an entire organization are… slim.

    I am not against doing stuff like this. I think it’s great for engagement and getting to know people and gaining industry knowledge in a broad sense, especially for people early in their careers or new to an industry or company. But calling a lunch and learn “professional development” is a stretch. It’s a lunch and learn.

  124. Workaholic*

    I think lunch and learns are great, if attendance is voluntary. If company provides lunch I’d most likely attend. But I’d balk and bev resentful if forced to.

  125. Princess Pumpkin Spice*

    Coming to these comments a bit late, but the best lunch and learn I had to sit through was actually breakfast. 30 minutes after the everyone started their shift (we have staggered shifts, but still have core hours), everyone went to the conference room. There was a really great spread of bagels, breakfast sandwiches, fruit, etc. We sat through the hour-long presentation, ate breakfast, and went back to our desks. Everyone took lunch as usual; the breakfast didn’t count against our breaks. OP, I’d suggest this instead of the traditional lunch and learn. Especially if you’re only doing it 4 times a year, I think you can provide a nice breakfast once a quarter.

  126. LW is Coming for Your Lunch*

    LW here!

    Wow, thank you Alison for posting my question so quickly! I appreciate all the different perspectives and feedback in the comments. Just to clarify – I was planning to cater the lunch with whatever the team wanted (it wouldn’t even occur to me to not provide free lunch). Regardless, I think we’re going to nix this idea in favor of other non-lunchtime activities.

    I do want to address the assumption that flexibility for salaried employees does not go both ways (at least on my team). I think part of the reason I was so irked by the employee’s response is that I DO go out of my way to provide as much flexibility as humanly possible, even in a traditional company that doesn’t embrace a flexible work culture. I allow WFH when it’s needed, I don’t require employees to use PTO for appointments or other personal errands, and I am not a “butts in seats” type of manager. I can count on one hand the number of hours my employees have collectively had to work outside of 8-5 hours, and that’s intentional. Sometimes I get my hand slapped by higher-ups or HR, but I so far haven’t had to enforce any policies that I feel will make me a bad human for the sake of being a good employee.

    Because that is the culture I want to create, the rigid response threw me for a loop. I think I just took it too personally and clocked it as “ungrateful,” when my management style is and should reflect my values as a human being, not how outwardly appreciative my employees seem to be. I don’t even disagree with the sentiment of the employee’s response. Maybe it just means they feel comfortable around me and our team, which is better than the alternative.

    Thanks everyone!

    1. Alice*

      Hi LW, what a thoughtful response.
      I am really hearing what you say about (at least initially, subconsciously) feeling like your reports should be grateful to you for expending some political capital on their behalf. I’m an IC where I work and my department head (several layers up from me, but many layers down from the top) said some things yesterday his boss deserving gratitude from us for trying, but not succeeding, to bring in some improvements to our workspace. It really rubbed me the wrong way at the time but, just as you have reflected, I am reflecting on the challenges of middle management.

  127. Ms.Vader*

    I despise lunch and learns – I refuse to go and say if the company actually valued it, it wouldn’t be on my lunch where I’m giving up my free time. Scrap this idea.

  128. Ceanothus*

    My previous employer was a government agency, and we often did optional lunch and learns for things that we couldn’t justify charging taxpayers for (or that our management wouldn’t authorize us to charge for) — reviewing someone’s paper for submission, learning about a new GIS tool, going over a new finding that tangentially affected our work.

    But we were all highly motivated and that was a field with a substantial passion tax.

  129. SB*

    As someone who is salaried and frequently works through their lunch….I actually really like lunch and learns. They’re often on a topic I need to know about from a continuing education standpoint, but not something that’s a “hair on fire” topic needed in order to do my job.

    Do other salaried folks not leave early or take other breaks during the day? I thought that was part of the appeal of salary, versus hourly. There’s supposed to be more flexibility. For instance, I’m working from home tomorrow and taking my dog to the vet over an extra long lunch break….because I frequently work long hours and no one cares if I have to do other stuff sometimes. (Honestly, I’ll probably only be a 6 hour or so employee tomorrow. ) I think playing the “I only work 8 hours a day” is going to result in my time being micromanaged.

    1. L-squared*

      I think a lot of people just like having a mid day break not encroached upon.

      For me its not about “Eating lunch”. But its about having a break in my day. Yes, i CAN work 7.5 hours straight and leave a bit early. But I’d rather break my day up.

    2. Tradd*

      I’m salaried in a very responsible position, but it’s in office. Taking breaks or leaving early? Hah! You’re in the office 8-5. There was a company wide teams call today during what would have been my regular lunch. I had to take my lunch an hour late due to that call. I get rather put out when my lunch is pushed off.

      1. SB*

        Maybe that’s the difference for me. I take breaks when I can, but I don’t have a scheduled lunch time. I eat when I’m hungry and I’ve got a stopping point in my work. It doesn’t matter that much to me. Sometimes it’s 11. Sometimes it’s 3pm.

        But, I understand not everyone operates that way. If I had a working lunch meeting, I’d just go take a walk as a break if I needed it or leave a little early if my schedule allowed.

    3. Kaden Lee*

      I was going to say something similar. Free lunch on the company dime and on a topic I can submit as a professional development unit for my certification? Cha-ching! Would much rather have a casual over lunch discussion of most things than another endless meeting right after lunch.

    4. AccountingForTime*

      I’ve never had a job that allowed less than 40 hours/week. It generally doesn’t have to be 5 8 hour days, but if the total us less than 40 I need to take time off. This has been true at many companies across a variety of industries.
      Exempt/non-exempt is about whether you get paid for your overtime.

      1. SB*

        Yeah, but the trade off about not being paid for overtime is that you’re supposed to be given a little flexibility in when you arrive and leave. Like, if I’m getting all my work done doing the week, my supervisor isn’t going to bat an eye at an early Friday departure.

        I don’t think I’d thrive in an environment where every moment of my day is scheduled and accounted for. Because sometimes I’m literally just sitting and thinking through a problem – that doesn’t LOOK super productive.

        1. SB*

          Oh man, I want to re-word some of the above comment.

          But – what I was trying to say, is that it’s not uncommon for me to work 45 hours a week. It’s less common, but not uncommon for me to work less than 40hrs a week. Someone asking me to go to a lunch and learn isn’t a big deal for me because my schedule is flexible enough most weeks to swallow it. Sometimes it’s not. (And those are the long weeks)

  130. hypoglycemic rage*

    genuine question, why is what the employee said so bad? or was it just the WAY it was said – too blunt? – that’s the problem?

    1. SB*

      Salaried positions require you to manage your time in a way that the work gets done. Sometimes that means working more when required and sometimes less (less common). Being rigid to 8hrs without discussing with your manager suggests you might not understand the expectations of salaried vs hourly. Your base pay is normally higher than hourly bc there’s an understanding you may have extra work sometimes

    2. L-squared*

      I think its one of those things where saying it out loud doesn’t often come across well. It’s the game that people play in the office of trying to frame it differently instead of just being honest.

      Some managers wouldn’t care, and others, like OP, think it says a lot about your professional aspirations. As much as I don’t agree with OP, its why you typically DON’T say that out loud.

  131. Raida*

    I’m all good with Lunch & Learns provided:
    What’s being learnt is interesting, not just training sessions
    Doesn’t eat into precious time where staff will feel more behind IE managers properly aware of workload and deadlines
    Food is good
    Infrequent with plenty of time to plan around them
    Managers encourage 10 min breaks morning and afternoon to be used
    Be clear it’s alright to plan to leave earlier that day

    Alternatively, I’ve had a manager who arranged a couple and quite simply we went to our *breaks* afterwards. It was just very very clear that full lunch is provided, they started by 11:30 at the latest, and everyone afterwards would check emails, chat a little about the session, and then leave for lunch breaks – at which we’re highly unlikely to eat anything.

  132. Abigail*

    An advantage of lunch and learn is that it’s easy to schedule because people are less likely to have things on their calendar then.

    Flexibility can be a wonderful asset. I prefer to use my lunch hour for my own admin, taking a walk, and of course eating. But every now and then I work through it or attend a lunch and learn. This is just part of being a salaried professional, I think.

    1. LabITRodent*

      I block out lunch every day, so it’s actually the only time I’m not going to show as free on my calendar. You’re welcome to put something on there, and I might choose to be generous, or not, depending on how my day/week is going. Lunch is a time for me to be away from my desk and hanging out with people who help me recharge so I can go back to work and dealing with coworkers.

  133. Perfectly Cromulent Name*

    Quarterly is not the end of the world, but when I was in an office I HATED lunch time things. My boss would be all “We are providing lunch, so it doesn’t matter!” But it did. For me, lunch was not about food. I would use my lunch to run errands and/or to recharge. I am an introvert and I would always leave my desk and hide at lunch. Lunch and Learns or anything like that just made me be “on” for that much longer, and I had to go deal with my dry cleaning/pick up groceries/whatever small errands I would do after work, when traffic and lines at said places were a soul sucking nightmare. Free pizza did nothing to fix this.

    That said, I could suck it up quarterly. It’s when it becomes a once a week (or even once month) required thing that I start losing my spadoingle.

  134. Staff*

    I use the occasional working lunch for my own staff, but my staff are hourly, not salary, and I have them on the clock. So they still get California’s mandatory lunch period after 5 hours, separate from the working lunch, and can use that as personal time. This seems to work very well, because it comes off more as a team bonding exercise, and isn’t an imposition on my employees.

  135. Underpaid analyst*

    A lot of commenters are coming from the experience of their lunch and learns supporting continuing education credits or licensing, but I have a different angle on this one.

    OP, how sure are you that these professional development webinars/presentations/lunches are actually helpful to your employees?

    My organization has been on a tear lately, convinced that the best way to address employee complaints about silos and a lack of professional development opportunities is… to have employees give presentations to each other about our different departments. They’re incredibly generic, a time suck, and have lead to no new collaboration along colleagues. I find them very irrelevant to my work and would be incredibly irritated to have my lunch taken up to sit through another one of these. (as for how many org can address our problems: upper managers notifying employees when they’re working on similar projects and have them connect, organizing social periods for employee mingling, and having funds/time for certifications/conferences/stretch projects).

    Make sure these presentations are something that your employees will find to be a value-add.

  136. Chad H*

    >> “I don’t want lunch and learns. I get paid to work eight hours a day, so why would I work nine?” I found this so very off-putting

    You know what I find off putting? Employers who expect their employee’s time when they’re not getting paid.

    1. I Have RBF*

      Seriously. I am often salary, but I had one manager tell me that he expected people to work 50 hours a week or more. No, and HR shut him down on that. My salary is based on 40 hours a week. That means that if I need to work more hours one week, I get comp time in another week. But the jackass was the kind of guy who made you take sick time for a doctors appointment at the end of the day, even if you already had 40 hours or more in the days previous. I’m glad I don’t work there any more – the whole “salary” thing was set up to always benefit the employer, never the employee.

  137. Analyst*

    Lunch and learn means you’re working. If you have non-exempt employees, you have to pay them. I’m salaried, and I’m still taking my break if I do one of these cause that’s work time.

    Oh, and whether or not they are common place or accepted has nothing to do with the concept having issues- it’s work time and should be counted as such, regardless of how it’s always been

  138. Maddie Buckley-Han*

    Most salaried roles advertise themselves as being 40 hours a week. Things come up sometimes but I am firmly in the camp who believes 1. This should be rare and 2. It’s completely fine to not want to work late or more than 40 hours a week.

    No one on their deathbed says gee I wish I worked more hours or gave the company more of my free time. Being so annoyed by this reply says a ton about the manager and what they think is important. The fact that she thinks this person maybe doesn’t deserve advancement is absolutely wild.

    Consider that some people are actually more efficient than you are, perhaps!

  139. Definitely not me*

    Almost 20 years ago I worked for a small branch of a large government contractor. It was mostly IT staff. We did lunch-and-learns for awhile, for two reasons: People with special skills could share them with others if they wanted to, and others who had an interest in that skill could voluntarily attend them. I offered training on various topics and I attended a few trainings given by others as well. People brought their own lunch. Like this letter-writer, we were all salaried so people knew they had to do “40 hours worth” of work (with an expectation that a high percentage of those hours would be billed to clients) and sometimes their weeks were lighter or heavier based on workload and deadlines. Those who didn’t like lunch-and-learns didn’t give them or attend them and that was perfectly fine.

  140. Betty In Chi*

    I F****ing hate lunch and learn or lunchtime meetings. When we transitioned to new leadership, I started categorically turning down lunch as an available meeting time. And when I do get scheduled for a lunch meeting, I block off the hour after. It’s not the number of hours in a day worked (I’m salaried)—it’s the notion that I don’t need any break in the day and *of course* I’ll work straight through, including lunch.

    If it’s “easy to schedule” because “no-one has anything scheduled at lunch”, you’re missing the point of why “no-one has anything scheduled at lunch.” We don’t have anything scheduled at lunch because we need to eat; to take a break from back to back meetings or just from work.

  141. Always Science-ing*

    As a person with (somewhat recently developed) disability and chronic illness I’ve come to realize that lunchtime work activities (lunch and learn, meetings, seminars, etc.) are not inclusive or accommodating. So if you want to promote accessibility, equity and inclusivity in your workplace pleased don’t schedule work activities over lunch. I MUST use lunch to rest and recuperate (in my own very specific way). It isn’t optional for me, or many others with similar conditions (fibromyalgia, ME/CFS, chronic pain, long covid, other central sensitivity syndromes). If I skip doing this one day I’ll feel awful for several days, and run the risk of getting extremely sick (look up post-exertional malaise). Please don’t routinely plan professional development opportunities that exclude those of us with disabilities. I wish I’d realized how exclusionary they are years ago, prior to developing my current disabilities I organized a lot of events/meetings/etc. over lunch because it was the norm in my workplaces.

    1. Friendly Office Bisexual*

      Ugh ugh ugh thank you for mentioning this. The disability piece is so often glossed over. I am not capable of working straight through the day with no breaks because of my disabilities, and the expectation that everyone “should” be able to do it if they’re salaried is really disheartening.

  142. Gh0st*

    Personally, I generally like Lunch and Learns because they allow me to enjoy free food while passively learning about something with my coworkers. They also leave the rest of my day free to do work that requires intense attention. If these meetings were held during the proper workday, it’d eat (heh) into that time and I probably wouldn’t be able to participate.

    I think if the LW wants to implement quarterly Lunch and Learns with food provided and opportunities for additional breaks during the rest of the workday, that’d be more than reasonable, especially if the content is interesting/helpful and has a demonstrable positive outcome.

    In my opinion, it’s fair to be put-off by the employee’s comment. The actual underlying sentiment that they don’t want to give up their lunch hour to work is reasonable (assuming they weren’t aware of the low frequency of the lunches impacted). However, the delivery and framing of the comment seems pretty unprofessional, especially since it doesn’t sound like they asked any clarifying questions before going there. I don’t think it alone should preclude the employee from advancing, but it does show a possible lack of soft skills and understanding of how salaried work usually works.

  143. WFH4VR*

    I loathe these “brown bag lunches” which is what they’re called at my job. 1) They don’t feed us lunch, we have to bring our own. 2) I really, really hate eating in front of a bunch of people. The side-eyes people give about what other people are eating borders on harassment. 3) If it’s so damned important, then schedule an actual meeting NOT during lunch time. I always come up with a dentist appointment or a report I have to finish to get out of these “forced fun” activities.

  144. Miss Buttons*

    Oh no you don’t. My lunchtime is MY lunchtime, not the company’s. They have no right to it. I use my lunch for walking, running errands, doing my personal stuff. I would never consent to lunch and learns that encroach on my lunchtime. And the company has no legal right to do it. Schedule them at 11-12 or 1-2 and give folks their lunchtime.

  145. fhqwhgads*

    I completely agree with what Alison said, but I also think “I get paid to work 8 hours, why would I work 9” is a bizarrely outsized reaction to a quarterly lunch thing. Being opposed to the lunch and learns in general during work time makes total sense to me. Wanting to protect one’s personal time I am all for. I’m not saying “dude should know better than to say that outloud” – but it is kinda oddly harsh given the frequency proposed.

  146. Murph*

    An organization I worked for would have monthly meetings over the lunch hour. It was frustrating because it added an extra hour to the work day and for people with desk jobs it was no big deal, for people who were patient facing for eight hours it was impossible to find any time that day to take care of things.

  147. Jane*

    Salaried employees are already taken advantage of time-wise, so I’m glad the employee pushed back. If the employer thinks it’s super important to attend, it should not replace a break. It should be on company time. And that’s the thing – it would TAKE UP the break. I’m shocked people here are like, “Well, just take a break later on.” It doesn’t work that way. You’re expected to work the rest of the day because the Lunch & Learn was your “break.” Salaried means working 40+ hours most of the time, not taking however many breaks you want, when you want. So no, if it’s mandatory, it should be during work time and not replace a break. Period.

    1. amoeba*

      I mean… sure, there are companies who treat it that way, but as LW is the boss, they can absolutely decide to do it differently?

  148. Anon for this, please*

    We had lunch and learns pretty regularly at a former place of employment, and they were pretty much despised. I was in an industry with high emotional investment and need to be “on,” and lunch was a tiny portion of the day to relax. On lunch and learn days, it was being “on” all day.

    The only mitigating factor was that the workplace provided lunch on those days. Okay, cool!

    Except for the times when lunch didn’t arrive on time, so those on the earliest lunch shift missed lunch *and* our one speck of down time during the day. Yeah. That sucked.

  149. Aardvark*

    Please don’t make me attended a compulsory meeting where I have to listen to my colleagues chew with their mouth open and slurp their drinks. A business dinner is one thing as the conversation and restaurant noise helps. But a session in which we are otherwise quietly listening to a presenter, please no.
    Separate eating from working when possible

    1. Tech Industry Refugee*

      I worked at a startup where the (otherwise pretty normal) CEO would choose the company meeting that he presented to eat his daily apple. Literally talking, crunching, and chewing at the same time.

  150. Freya*

    In Australia, if it’s work-related training provided by the workplace, it must be paid. Time spent in training is time worked. If it’s compulsory, then it DEFINITELY counts as time worked and must be paid. And also, for OH&S purposes, a working lunch does not count as a break – and doesn’t count as a rest break and may not count as a meal break if there are rules about those in your Award (in the Award I’m covered under, I get at least one 30+ minute meal break for every work day longer than 5 hours as well as my rest breaks, and if I don’t get my meal break, I get paid double time until I get that meal break).

  151. TheBunny*

    OP is talking about once per quarter with food provided by the company.

    I don’t see the issue. Weekly or bi-weekly would be an issue but every 3 months? The issue is the employee’s response. I’m salaried and I end up working more than 8 hours way more often than once per quarter.

    Yes as Alison mentioned norms are changing…but let’s focus on the crazy stuff that needs to change, not a once per quarter team lunch.

  152. Ganymede II*

    For me it’s not as much a matter of how many hours I am working in a day, it’s that I badly need a brain-break. I need to have silence, or light chats about what people are doing in the weekend, or what is everyone watching/ reading these days. If not, I find my brain is completely scrambled by the afternoon. A lunch-and-learn means I will be way less effective in the afternoon, so I prefer to skip those.

  153. amoeba*

    I like working lunches and for me they would actually be a perk – provided the topic is actually interesting and the food is good.

    However, I would also absolutely count them as work time, not as break time – so LW, any specific reason you can’t just tell you employees that? As in, feel free to leave early and/or take a break at some other point during those days? I feel like that would solve all the problems pretty easily. (I’d probably still make them recommended but optional so that people who are in the middle of important projects or whatever don’t lose precious worktime/have to work overtime because of them…)

  154. The Other Dawn*

    (I meant to post this here, not up top.)

    We have these a few times a year at my company and people like them since they’re getting free food and it’s optional. For non-exempt employees, they just don’t punch out for that hour; they get paid for it. Then they take that break at some other point during the day and punch out. Exempt employees do the same thing, although they don’t punch a time clock.

  156. Czhorat*

    I still half-resent that over 15 years ago I missed a chance to meet Penn Gillette (of Penn and Teller fame) when he accepted an invitation from one of my juggling friends to pass clubs in the park. My lunch hour is time that I use to recharge and get away from my desk.

    That said, it IS a normal enough thing in my industry and it’s just something I’ve come to accept. It’s never been more than once a week, and usually less than that; if you’re making someone skip their lunch break one day ever week or two I think it’s fine. If it’s multiple times a week then it might feel as if they’ve lost their lunch hour.

    1. Future*

      I’d resent that too!

      I learned a long time ago never to choose work over important life events. I wish I could go back and tell my younger self that.

  157. Future*

    Another thing about introducing lunchtime learning sessions: how pinched are your staff feeling by your company? If they’re feeling like they’re expected to give it all to the company with little return, if salaries are low and haven’t been adjusted in ages, if they’re also continuing to be asked for more and more bits of their time with no compensation, if their workloads are increasing but their compensation isn’t, if the training will benefit the company (because then they can check a box saying they do CPD/CE) but not the employees, then a lunch and learn will be a hard sell, especially if it’s unpaid.

    On the other hand, if the employees can clearly see the benefit both to themselves and the company, and if they generally feel respected and well-compensated, then maybe the occasional lunch and learn will be accepted or even welcomed.

    My last company tried to do lunch and learns that were unpaid and the company was not generally perceived as valuing its employees at all. There was a lot of pushback and eventually we got compensated. I didn’t attend the unpaid events on principle, even though I actually enjoyed the events in and of themselves. (We were in education and didn’t get to see each other very often, and most of us genuinely liked each other).

  158. Andrea*

    We JUST HAD A DISCUSSION about food restrictions here.

    I have celiac disease, and here’s what “lunch and learn” is for me: “hey, everyone! We’re having a meeting at breakfast/lunch time! There will be pizza/bagels/sandwiches provided by the company, none of which you can eat, and while it’s not mandatory, you’ll miss out on content and networking that will help you get ahead if you skip it, but you also can’t take a separate time to eat before or after!”

  159. celestialisms*

    My work requires us to take an unpaid minimum half hour lunch every day, so any lunch meetings come straight out of my personal time. People still schedule them. Drives me nuts.

  160. Clymene*

    If you are salaried, why can’t you take a different hour off for a break on days when you have lunch and learns?

  161. mbs001*

    For goodness sake, people! They’re talking about a lunch ‘n learn once every quarter. Suck it up. If you don’t want to expand your professional expertise or areas of understanding, don’t go. You’re only hurting yourself. And if your a clock-watcher, you will most likely not be moving up the ladder.

  162. zolk*

    Lunch and learns are common in my field and I attend them. But we’re unionized and my lunch hour is protected by a very intense contract, so I take my lunch after the lunch and learn. We rarely get to actually eat during a lunch and learn anyway–I just consider it a poorly timed meeting.

  163. TDHR*

    Lunch and learns/work through lunch requests are fine. Just remember that, for non-overtime exempt employees, you have to pay them for that (you asked for the overtime by requesting they be there) OR let them have the time back. This should be documented to protect all concerned. I think flexibility on both sides can help. Personally, whenever asked to attend a lunch and learn, I inform my manager that I can attend, but only if I can take the time back or be paid for the extra hours in same pay period.

  164. SS*

    My company does optional Lunch & Learns. Things like – sharing Outlook hacks, diving deep into one department’s functions, and other non-required but interesting-to-some-people topics. They are truly optional, meaning no penalty for non-attendance. This model works well. We will occasionally have unavoidable mandatory meetings over lunch but it’s pretty rare (maybe one day a month).

    And, our total work day is 8 hours which includes a 45-min paid lunch.

    1. Tilly*

      See, if it’s optional meaning opt-in, like it’s an activity taking place at work but not working per se, that’s fine.

      If it’s optional meaning opt-out, like you’re expected to do it by your line manager but can be exempted if necessary, that is working and shouldn’t come out of your break time.

  165. Astrid*

    As someone with misophonia, I generally avoid being around people when they eat. At my last firm, it was pure torture to be seated around a conference table trying to pay attention to the meeting when the partner’s crunching noises made me want to throttle her. (Office services denied my request to omit chips from the standard lunch order – not that it would have mattered, I guess, the crudités and salad would have been intolerable.)

  167. SusieQQ*

    I hate working lunches. Yes, sometimes they are A Thing. I bow out whenever I can and they’re not required, because my lunchtime is sacred.

    If I have to go to a working lunch, I make sure that I take a break either before or after. Because that’s the real thing for me… it’s not about me having lunch, it’s about me getting a mid-day break. Most companies I’ve seen do working lunches don’t seem to get this. Working lunches aren’t a break, they’re work.

  168. Cookingcutie11*

    Insert GIF of Michael Scott screaming “no…No.” Do not take your employees’ lunch break away. At minimum you should be providing them with lunch but why can’t it be scheduled during another time? People need to rest and recuperate during the workday and that is the point of a lunch break. When you fill it in with a meeting or other training, you’re not giving them a mental or physical break. I once had a job where we were in all-day training (ie, away from our desks) on a new system and they ordered lunch for everyone and I did not find out until I was out running an errand that it was a “working lunch.” I had to run my errand and that was the only day I could do it. Personally I am resentful if I’m forced to take a working lunch for some nonsense training. It’s a different matter if I’m having a very busy day and I make the choice to eat lunch at my desk.

  170. Jay*

    As someone who uses lunch to decompress, and for assorted reasons does not enjoy eating in front of others (nor can I always find something I can/will eat on a small menu like those found at catered lunches), I often find myself picking at sides/desserts at lunch meetings (because everyone has an opinion if you just don’t eat), and then either taking my actual lunch afterward or simply being hungry. I would be frustrated and annoyed if a supervisor seemed to talk about making that a regular sort of event because “it’s easy” or “everyone can participate” when that is just not the case.

  171. Tilly*

    Under UK law a break is not a break if you are working. At all. And breaks have to be provided whether they’re paid or unpaid. So here it doesn’t matter if you’re salaried, a lunch and learn would not be a lunch break. A real break would have to be provided as well.

    I think that’s reasonable. If a lunch & learn is mandatory, food should be provided and it doesn’t count as your break. If it’s optional, food may or may not be provided (although providing it is an incentive to turn up), but it also doesn’t count as your break.

    There’s more nuance in there about how long a break has to be and being paid for working hours, but if your employer has told you to do something, that is working time.

  172. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

    If it’s a lunchtime meeting that’s mandatory you have got to let people take their actual lunch break either before or after. From my experience your IT department can get very creatively hostile when we’ve not had our 1 hour away from the work time.

  173. Mid*

    It’s so interesting that some industries aren’t big into Lunch and Learns! I feel like they’ve been at least monthly everywhere I’ve worked. However, I work in the legal industry, so these are often for CLE credits needed for lawyers to keep their license active. They also always have an employer provided lunch, and are optional (though most people aren’t going to pass up free CLE credits *and* free lunch.) And all the hourly staff were either paid an hour of OT, or got to take a break later/leave earlier to make up for the working hour. Salaried employees did not get OT or to leave early though.

    I love my lunch break, but I also don’t see it as a horrible intrusion if once in a quarter, or even once a month (MAX), my employer provides a good lunch and we spend an hour doing something that’s actually relevant and educational. I think inter-team cross training can be great (what does the AP team actually do? Marketing? What does the sales flow look like?), or industry updates (like if there is major legislative changes to your industry, or a new technology change), or concrete skills (how to set working hours in outlook and properly use the scheduling feature, how do you use the new benefits portal, etc) and make them strongly encouraged but optional if someone is truly too busy to take the time to attend. They also need to run on time! If it’s an hour, it needs to end at the 1 hour mark, not 90 minutes.

Comments are closed.