E6 EZ EE THE WASHINGTON POST.WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 28 , 2019
lunch
BY JACOB BROGAN
Packing your lunch. The very
phrase suggests unwelcome la-
bor, less a matter of preparing for
work than a kind of effort in its
own right. Maybe the act finds
you morning groggy, coffee still
titrating into your bloodstream as
you shovel last night’s feta-speck-
led farro into a plastic container.
Or perhaps rosy-fingered dawn
catches you layering deli-sliced
salami and cheese into an almost-
stale baguette.
This is the trouble you go to so
that you won’t have to put in any
work later. It is, inevitably, a soli-
tary form of labor, but its results
will play out in collective space.
What, then, of the etiquette of the
packed lunch? How should we
comport ourselves as we consume
that which we have carried in?
“The key is no one must be
aware that you are scarfing down
food in your cubicle,” the Globe
and Mail of Toronto archly in-
structs, paraphrasing the guid-
ance of an ostensibly helpful eti-
quette guru. “No one must know
eating is a pastime you indulge in
every once in a while.”
This is pure perversity. Lunch,
even office lunch, can be a marvel-
ous thing. Maybe there’s a mov-
able wonderland of food trucks
outside your office. Maybe there’s
a particularly good Sicilian pizza
place that delivers and a cadre of
co-workers who share your affec-
tion for anchovies and onions.
There is no sense depriving your-
self of such pleasures when you
can take them: Work is dispiriting
enough as is.
That goes double for the
packed lunch. If you’re going to
pass up the opportunity for a
buffalo fried chicken sandwich or
a ranch-dressing-soaked salad —
wonders, all — you still deserve to
revel in your own delights. You
may have to excuse yourself when
your co-workers head out to for-
age for their own victuals, but you
still have every right to suggest to
them that you, too, intend, as a
talking goat once put it, to live
deliciously.
This means, first, that you
should ignore most of the advice
that others dish out about plating
your workplace dishes. Contrary
to almost all received wisdom,you should feel free to heat up
smelly food in the microwave. For
one thing, the attempt to restrict
culinary odors is, all too often,
about policing the cultures and
cuisines of nonwhite people. In
any case, it’s possible to be irritat-
ed by all sorts of food-related
things, including the mere sound
of chewing. As the Kitchn’s Rachel
Sugar puts it, “You hate the smell
of curry, I hate the smell of tuna,
and yet we must coexist together
in functional harmony.”
Instead of living in fear of office
puritans, aim to delight them. Byall means, perfume the floor with
spices and citrus and oil. Your
co-workers may act irritated, but
really they’re just going to be
jealous. When they ask after the
smells, take their query for what it
really is: an opportunity to brag
about what a terrific cook you are.
That said, you absolutely
should not actually cook your
food in the shared microwave —
with some exceptions given for
prepackaged meals designed to
be prepared that way. The odifer-
ousness of fish, for example, is
entirely excusable, but nuking itin an environment that will turn it
to rubber? That’s just rude to the
fish itself. Your meal, be it leftover
spaghetti or mapo tofu, should be
largely complete by the time you
leave home in the morning.
(It should also probably go
without saying, but do not, under
any circumstances, try to roast
chicken in the shared toaster
oven. This is your office, not your
sophomore-year dorm room. The
toaster oven is for toast, and the
fact that no one ever seems to
actually eat toast at work is no
excuse to confront your unwitting
colleagues with the possibility of
salmonella.)
You must also prepare your
meal with an eye toward the pos-
sibility of theft. While some eti-
quette guides instruct you on
what to do once the miscreant has
made off with your food, you’re
better off discouraging them from
taking it in the first place. Yes,
labeling may help, but only if the
thief seeks plausible deniability.
You’re better off storing your food
in containers that no one wants to
look at in the first place.
If you are bringing a sandwich,
avoid the urge to wrap it delicate-
ly in butcher paper as they would
at some artisanal hoagie shop:
You will only make your col-
leagues want to unwrap it before
you can. Elegant glass containers,
likewise, may make your lunch
look like a museum piece, which
seems lovely, but is actually like
taunting Danny Ocean when you
own a poorly secured casino.
Better to cram your homemade
delicacies in brown paper bags or
used cottage cheese containers
(washed, of course). Your lunch
should be a showpiece while you
are eating it, but it need not pre-sent itself beforehand. In any
case, it’s always best to keep
things simple: Containers with
separate compartments rarely
separate the components proper-
ly. Bringing a host of smaller ones,
meanwhile, will just make you
look fussy. Besides, you’ll always
forget some crucial one, leaving
yourself with quinoa, thinly sliced
celery and nothing that actually
makes you want to eat the two of
them together.
However dingy your plas-
ticware may be, though, there’s no
reason to leave it lying on your
desk unwashed after you finish
your meal. Given how much time
you have, presumably, already
saved by not trekking out to buy
lunch, there is no reason that you
shouldn’t take a moment or two to
clean your containers. If the desk
lunch is fundamentally sad, then
there is surely nothing sadder
than shoveling it into your face at
a messy desk. And lest you need
more motivation, you’ll never
have to worry about whether
you’re responsible for those dis-
quieting emails from HR about
pests in the building.
But the most important thing
to remember about bringing your
lunch to work is that you will be
eating it early. Maybe it’s the ef-
fort that goes into readying it in
the first place, but you’ll surely
end up stuffing your face before
the clock rings noon. And that’s
fine, but it also demands that you
follow one last etiquette guide-
line, not out of respect for your
co-workers, but in kindness to
your future self: Remember, al-
ways, to bring an extra snack.
After all, you’re sure to be hungry
again by late afternoon.
[email protected]Nuke your fish with impunity: Office etiquette is evolving
ANDREW COLIN BECK FOR THE WASHINGTON POSTBY TIM CARMAN
My first job in journalism was
as a clerk in the Wyandotte
County bureau for the Kansas
City Star, back when the daily
was still an afternoon newspa-
per. Clerking was one of those
entry-level journalism gigs that
had few perks but endless
amounts of grunt work, all for (in
my case) the poverty-level wage
of $1,000 a month.
I loved that job, less for the
work than for the people I
worked with. I’m still friends
with some of them. Our bond has
survived more than three dec-
ades and countless moves across
the country. I’m convinced that
one of the things that forged our
bond — other than the happy
hours, the Kansas City Royals
baseball games and the brutal
late-morning deadlines — was
our semi-regular lunches togeth-
er. After our stories cleared the
editors in the early afternoon, we
would assemble at, say, a local
Tex-Mex restaurant and feast on
combo plates and enjoy a cold
bottle of Mexican lager, with a
wedge of lime shoved down its
throat.
We’d gossip. We’d laugh. We’d
blow off steam. We’d forget about
work for an hour.
That kind of afternoon lunch
has all but disappeared, sucked
into some malevolent black hole
created by corporate downsizing,
email culture and the endless
stupefaction of the Internet. I am
as guilty as the next cubicle
drone who claims he has no time
for such midday munching.
I recently put the question out
there on Twitter: Do you eat
lunch at your desk? If so, why?
The nearly 50 responses were
telling. By a margin of 2 to 1,
people said they ate at their
desks. Their reasons were typi-
cally one of the following: They
want to leave work before 5 p.m.,
and lunching in place allows
them to do so without guilt. They
want to eat something healthier
than the average restaurant
meal. They’re too busy to take a
break. They want to catch up on
the news while noshing on a
sandwich. They’re afraid they’ll
miss something important.
The folks who leave their
desks for lunch said they do so
because they need a mental
health break. Or because they
want to get some exercise. Or
because they want to get away
from co-workers who will ask
them questions during their
lunch break. Or because they feel
more refreshed and productive
when they return to their work
stations after leaving the build-
ing for 30 minutes or so.
Their answers line up with the
contemporary thinking about
the hazards of dining at your
desk, much of which is focused
on mental health, overeating,
productivity or the filthiness of
your actual work area. (Here at
The Washington Post, we were
recently informed that our
crumb-laden desks are attracting
cockroaches, which is just awful.
Cockroaches never pack their
own lunches.) In other words, the
rationale for abandoning your
desk for lunch often revolves
around how you can improve
your work performance or re-
fresh your spirit, which, in turn,
improves your work perform-
ance.
I think Stalin would approve
the message: We smite the lazy
workers!
I would like to suggest a
gentler reason for exiting the
building for lunch: Your friends
and co-workers need you, andThe real reason to step away from
your desk during lunch: Connection
ANDREW COLIN BECK FOR THE WASHINGTON POSTyou need them.
Don’t get me wrong. The Inter-
net is great for paying bills and
looking like you’re busy. But it’s
not so great for making connec-
tions, despite the implied prom-
ises of Facebook, Twitter, Insta-
gram, blah, blah, blah. Much has
been written about the associa-
tion between Internet usage and
social isolation and depression.
I’m not about to feign expertise
in these matters. I’m just going to
tell you what’s true for me: I feel a
whole lot better when I’m con-
nected with friends and co-work-
ers, not with my phone or com-
puter.
I feel better when I walk to a
co-worker’s desk and ask, “Got
time for lunch?” I feel better
when I see how delighted they
are that I just posed the question,
even if they’re too busy to join
me. I feel better sharing a meal
with them, savoring the words
between us as much as the food
on the plate. I feel better when I
hear a friend laugh or sense the
affection in a friend’s words, the
unmistakable comforts of the
human voice. I feel better when
the world does not revolve
around the next email or pop-up
notification.
Perhaps this is more personal
for me than it is for you. As a
child who spent most of his time
alone, I’m vulnerable to the false
companionship of the Internet. I
made a promise to myself, and
others, to talk publicly about
depression. If you ask me, one of
the best ways to confront depres-
sion, or even just a blue mood, is
to step away from your computer
and have lunch with a friend.
Who knows? Maybe 30 years
from now, they’ll still be your
friends, like my old colleagues
from the Kansas City Star.
[email protected]BY AMY ETTINGER
The scene was the same every
day at Deb Shell’s house in Berke-
ley, Calif. She would send her
three children to elementary
school with packed lunches, and
they would come home with their
lunch bags almost completely
full. Shell started talking to other
parents and learned that the
Berkeley Unified School District
had cut lunchtime at some
schools to add additional instruc-
tional minutes to the classroom.
Many kids were going through
the day hungry.
When Shell and other parents
went to observe lunch, they saw
that the problem was even worse
for students who had to stand in
line for their meals. The students
are supposed to have 20 minutes
to eat, but they often have only 15,
Shell said. “We heard the [ending]
lunch bell ring, and there were
still 18 kids outside who hadn’t
been served,” she said. “They got
their food and dumped it right in
the trash and were dismissed for
recess. It was heart-wrenching to
watch elementary-aged kids not
eat and infuriating to see the food
wasted.”
In June, Shell started a petition
on Change.org to get lunchtime
extended at her kids’ school. Since
then, she has collected more than
1,300 signatures.
Berkeley is one of the only
school districts in the country to
institute a comprehensive garden
and cooking program, thanks in
part to the advocacy efforts of
food activist and chef Alice Wa-
ters. But in a district where stu-
dents grow their own “weedos,” a
wrap made of herbs and vegeta-
bles, many of them do not have
time to eat them.
“It’s becoming a stressful, al-
most traumatic experience when
kids go into the lunchroom,” said
Angela McKee-Brown, director of
education for the Edible School-
yard Project, a nonprofit organi-
zation founded by Waters that
works with more than 5,500 gar-
den and education programs
worldwide. “The cafeteria is the
one place that kids of all back-
grounds and abilities get to be in
community with each other.”
Berkeley students spend a good
deal of time learning where food
comes from, but lunch appears to
be teaching them more about fast
food — or at least quickly con-
sumed food — than anything else.
“We’re investing all this time and
resources about the beautiful na-
ture of food, and you go into the
cafeteria and you’re constrained
by time,” McKee-Brown said.
Superintendent Brent Ste-
phens declined to comment on
the lunch issues in the district,
other than to say that administra-
tors plan to work this fall to
understand what can be done toimprove the experience for stu-
dents. Bonnie Christensen, the
district’s director of nutrition ser-
vices, confirmed that food is be-
ing wasted since the district add-
ed instructional minutes and
shortened some schools’ lunch
periods.
The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids
Act of 2010 was a signature initia-
tive of former first lady Michelle
Obama, and the program made
school lunches healthier than the
corn dogs and tater tots of a
generation ago. School meals
must be lower in fat and salt,
contain lean protein, and offer
fruits, vegetables and whole
grains. Lunches have require-
ments for minimum and maxi-
mum number of calories, but
there is no national standard on
how much time kids get to eat
that meal. That is left to the
discretion of local districts.
But the length of the school
lunch period is a key factor in how
much nutrition children actually
get, said Juliana Cohen, assistant
professor of nutrition at the Har-
vard T.H. Chan School of Public
Health. Her research shows that
students who get less than 20
minutes for lunch consume sig-
nificantly less of their meal than
children who have more time. At
Berkeley, getting through the line
takes so long that some students
have just four minutes to eat their
entire lunch.
Often, the time restrictions hit
the neediest kids hardest, Cohen
said. “Low-income children rely
on school meals for half their
daily energy intake,” she said.
The Trump administration’s re-
cent proposal to cut 3 million
people from the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program
would probably make it even
more difficult for poor children to
get enough food, Cohen said.
“With vulnerable children poten-
tially losing SNAP benefits, they
will likely need to rely even more
on school meals,” she said. “It is
even more important that these
children have sufficient time to
eat.”
The SNAP cuts could also mean
that 500,000 kids could lose auto-
matic eligibility for free lunches,
House Democrats have warned.
Parents who can afford it some-
times spare their children long
waits in lunch lines by packing
food for them. But brown-bag
lunches are often filled with more
snacks and junk food than what is
offered by meal programs, Cohen
said. And research shows that
children who eat healthier foods
learn better and have fewer disci-
plinary issues, she said.
Last year, the federal govern-
ment spent $13.8 billion on free,
reduced-price and full-price
lunches, according to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture. The
USDA does not regulate the timefor lunch, but spokesman Jack
Currie said that “the regulations
do encourage local entities to set
meal periods that provide ad-
equate time for both the meal to
be served and for students to
consume meals, to increase the
adequacy of student intakes and
minimize plate waste.”
For now, it is up to districts to
set how much time students get
for lunch. Parents who are push-
ing for longer lunch periods often
hear that there are not enough
minutes in the day, said Christine
Davis, founder of Arizonans for
Recess and School Wellness.
Each state has its own require-
ments for the number of hours
kids need to be in school. But rigid
schedules that minimize recess
and lunchtime often happen be-
cause of the pressure of district-
chosen curriculums aimed at
raising test scores, Davis said.
Many nutritionists, doctors
and parents want a federal stan-
dard for lunch periods. The Amer-
ican Academy of Pediatrics is
pushing for at least 20 minutes of
seated eating time, not including
the time it takes for students to
wash their hands, walk to the
cafeteria and get their food, said
Robert Murray, a spokesman for
the AAP. There is no way for kids
to get enough nutrition for the
day in less than 20 minutes, and
it’s the children who most need
the food that are really hurting,
Murray said. “It’s really impor-
tant for these kids to eat the whole
meal.”
Too-short meal times teach
children to wolf down their food,
potentially creating lifelong bad
habits, he added. Kids who are
being rushed at lunch are not just
missing out on important calo-
ries, but also aren’t learning
about how fun it can be to sit and
share a meal, Murray said.
“Lunchtime is really about the
social enjoyment of being with
their friends,” he said.
Amy Ulrich, a parent in Belle-
vue, Wash., successfully lobbied
her local district to increase
lunchtime from 20 to 25 minutes
a few years ago.
She submitted a resolution to
the National Parent Teacher Asso-
ciation, which she hopes will ad-
dress school lunch time at its June
2020 convention. “The PTA exists
as a child welfare organization,
and they should have a position
on it,” Ulrich said.
Having the backing of the na-
tional PTA, she said, would help
parents push for better standards
at the local level. “Oddly enough,”
she said, “something so simple as
school lunch is one of the hardest
things to change in schools.”
[email protected]Amy Ettinger is the author of “Sweet
Spot: An Ice Cream Binge Across
America” (Dutton, 2017).Lunchtime is so short in some public
schools, students are going hungry