Productivity and the Three-Martini Lunch

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

•  
  1

  CFKane84

  07/25/08 | Report as spam

  Go back to the age of bottle in the bottom drawer?

  I don't even keep my scotch in the bottom drawer, most of the time it's just sitting on my desk saying to everyone, I work hard, I drink hard. If anyone has an issue with that, bring over an empty glass... actually that last part's a joke. I keep a fully stocked wet bar in a locked file cabinet that come with everything including glassware and bitters. And the worst part, most of it started after watching Mad Men... I do work on Madison Avenue after all.

•  
  2

  sbrennaman354

  07/28/08 | Report as spam

  Productivity and the Three-Martini Lunch

  Another case of individual rights ands responsibility versus the rights and responsibility of the corporation. I voted for corporate responsibility and establishing HR programs to help employees with problems. But lets face it employees that have problems do not seek out help until they are faced with elimination form the workforce or worse. Another point is how long do you give an employee (regardless of level and performance) to shape up before you ship them out? The PC world we live in today will make it longer than it needs to be and society is still left with a problem drinker, just unemployed. Bottom Line: give ?em one chance to square up then move on. The corporation is not a social welfare institution (unless it is the government). As far as business and the use of alcoholic beverages, personal control is the answer. Give employees broad suggestions/guidelines and let them act accordingly (If you hired them then you can see the end result if you did your job right in the hiring process). Policy prohibitions do not work, in fact they encourage a game of ?catch me if you can?.

•  
  3

  Michael.Mattis@...

  07/28/08 | Report as spam

  Good point

  "The PC world we live in today will make it longer than it needs to be and society is still left with a problem drinker, just unemployed. Bottom Line: give ?em one chance to square up then move on."
  
  An excellent point.

•  
  4

  ennyman

  07/28/08 | Report as spam

  RE: Productivity and the Three-Martini Lunch

  It's very difficult in the era of privacy to get invasive. Yes, companies should support alcohol/drug rehab and counseling measures and most insurance programs probably have this... but like most problems, the person with the problem probably feels shame at the problem and may not readily come forward.
  
  Banning alcohol from functions (Christmas Party) seems more of a punishment to the responsible people than a solution to the problem. The alcoholics and drug addicts are going to be doing it anyways one way or another.
  
  The "do you drink" question for new hires seems bizarre. What purpose does it serve since most people drink responsibly? And it seems illegal to ask, "Are you an alcoholic?" Like, duh... Reply: "Um, I'm not sure what to say here, Regis. Can I use a lifeline? I'd like to phone a friend."
  
  The key is having good management that is trained to address the issue when it impacts performance in the workplace. Performance should be the real criteria. Also, in some jobs there are serious dangers and lives at risk (or injuries), so it cannot be ignored.

•  
  5

  Acerebel

  07/28/08 | Report as spam

  Shame

  I am utterly opposed to alcohol in the workplace, for the following reasons, based on 35 years in both the private and public (government) workforce:
  
  - drinkers often behave with reduced impulse control and their coworkers may be exposed, therefore, to heightened risks around bullying, harassment, sexual innuendo
  
  - drinkers often become incompetent (to degrees that increase with each drink) and either cannot perform their duties properly or, and this is even worse, believe they are performing well or making sound decisions when they are operating at less-than-optimum levels
  
  - drinkers can be hazardous to themselves and others within the workplace, particularly if any kind of machinery is operated
  
  - drinkers can be hazardous to other people outside the office, particularly if they are driving back to the office, to pick up the kids, to do the shopping or to go home
  
  - drinkers can themselves be at risk outside of the office, as they go home (for example, first from potential attack by others who recognise their impaired state (at railway or bus stations, or in dark shortcuts) and second, by not recognising when they're safe as pedestrians in busy traffic)
  
  - drinkers often have other addictive behaviours, such as gambling, and these behaviours can be triggered by alcohol consumption, leading to over-expenditure, or even misappropriation of funds
  
  - staff who are alcoholics and are dry should not be exposed within their place of work to alcohol; the workplace should be a safe place for them (noting also that drinkers frequently pressure and bully non-drinkers about their abstinence by reference to being 'babies' or 'party-poopers', calling manhood into question and so on)
  
  I also believe that there is a certain amount of duty-of-care that falls to employers. It is beholden on the employer to provide a safe working environment, and such safety CANNOT be assured if the employer is serving or permitting alcohol to be served, and/or tolerating drinking during working hours (including staff coming back from lunch having consumed alcohol).
  
  I have no problem with people drinking responsibly in their own homes or in licensed establishments, but never in the workplace.

•  
  6

  sbrennaman354

  07/29/08 | Report as spam

  Shame

  I agree with all 7 of your points. However, you addresses alcohol use and consumption in the "workplace". How do you regulate alcohol consumption at lunch in a non-business manner? As I said in my piece personal responsibility and broad guidelines have to be the manner in which the problem (potential and actual) are dealt with by manageement. Managemeent has to set the example by not having a "closet" bar. No matter how secret they may be the workforce will know.

•  
  7

  Acerebel

  07/29/08 | Report as spam

  Shame and the closet bar

  Yes, you're right. Management has to not be drinking at work either; all those "stay and have a glass of wine" invitations at 6:00 pm, to the favoured few (and yes, I've been asked, so it's not (pardon the pun) sour grapes). You want to network? Do it with soft drinks. If you can't do it without alcohol, then you're not networking, you're boozing.
  
  As to drinking at lunch, away from work, I think if you've been drinking at lunch, you shouldn't come back to the office. Work hours should be like "on duty" for police, armed services and so on (or at least, as the rules are, if not always the conduct). Your absence after lunch will be noted, no doubt, and then your supervisor/manager can take appropriate action. If some people are repeatedly not there after lunch ... well, I guess that tells the story about potential drinking problems, doesn't it.
  
  It's so easy to say "well, it's just a couple of glasses of wine". But when people have been drinking, I don't want them serving me behind the counter, looking over a contract, making decisions about my health care, teaching my nephews, writing policies that affect me and so forth. If someone has been taking the drug alcohol, his/her judgement (whether he/she recognises it or not) is impaired.

•  
  8

  abonilla

  07/29/08 | Report as spam

  RE: Productivity and the Three-Martini Lunch

  Every aspect of our modern life is micro-managed and over analyzed. For the love of Pete, where's my bottle in the bottom of the drawer! As long as we, as a society, is compassionate to those with substance abuse problems, that's enough. We don't need to treat ALL folks who drink as if they are alcoholics.