About Us  |  About Cheetah®  |  Contact Us

Survey finds American workers spend an average of $3000 a year on coffee and lunch at work

American workers spend an alarmingly high amount of their hard earned cash on somewhat average daily expenses, according to a new Workonomix survey by Accounting Principals. The survey found that 50 percent of the American workforce spends approximately $1000 a year on coffee, or a weekly coffee habit of more than $20. And the spending doesn’t stop there. Two thirds (66 percent) of working Americans buy their lunch instead of packing it, costing them an average of $37 per week — nearly $2,000 a year.

Despite these high costs, the survey suggests workers are unclear about the biggest drain to their wallet. When asked which work expense they most want to be reimbursed for by their employer, 42 percent of employees chose commuting costs and only 11 percent chose lunch expenses. However, the average American’s commuting cost is $123 a month or approximately $1500 a year, which is well below the average annual lunch tab of $2000.

“Small — but consistent — expenses add up quickly over time, and it can be difficult for consumers to realize it because they’re only spending a few dollars at a time. But, as our survey shows, those few dollars can quickly turn into a few thousand dollars,” said Jodi Chavez, senior vice president, Accounting Principals. “Additionally, when you look at it over a worker’s lifetime, that number grows exponentially. Consider the average American who works for about 40 years, starting their first job around age 22. By the time they retire at age 62 they would have spent at minimum $120,000 on coffee and lunch, not including inflation.”

This is especially true for young American workers. The survey found that younger professionals (ages 18-34) spend almost twice as much on coffee during the week than those ages 45+ ($24.74 vs. $14.15, respectively). They also shell out more for lunch, spending an average of $44.78 per week on lunch compared to their older colleagues who spend $31.80 per week. However, it seems American workers of all ages are starting to realize the effect this incremental spending has on their personal bottom line. According to the survey, one-third (35 percent) of employees have made it a financial goal to bring lunch instead of buying it in 2012.

Other survey findings include:

  • Better food and coffee in the office might help cut back personal spending. Perhaps because of how much they’re spending outside the office, American workers would like companies to invest in better food and drinks in the office. One-quarter (25 percent) of Americans wish their company would invest in better vending machine snacks and 22 percent of American workers would like their company to invest in better coffee in the office.
  • Employers should focus on the “simple pleasures” to keep employees happy. Although better food and drinks would be a plus, employees most want to see their companies invest in better office equipment (46 percent) and more comfortable office chairs (32 percent) in 2012.
  • Corporate discounts do not factor into employees’ purchase decisions. Companies looking to attract new candidates shouldn’t focus on corporate discounts as a selling point. The majority (82 percent) of employees say corporate discounts matter little or not at all when buying a new product or service.

“As the recovery gains momentum and companies look to attract and retain talent, they should consider worrying less about big-ticket discounts and focus instead on what will impact their employees’ happiness every day,” said Chavez. “Small improvements around the office, such as better equipment, food and drinks, can make a big difference in workers’ morale. After all it is often the little things in life that tend to make people the happiest.”

Source: Accounting Principals; www.accountingprincipals.com.

Full-time presence may not be essential function; fired HR rep whose postpartum depression delayed return to full time may take claims to jury

July 19th, 2018

By Kathleen Kapusta, J.D.
Emphasizing the harsh reality that “people with disabilities, as a group, occupy an inferior status in our society, and are severely disadvantaged … economically,” and that in passing the ADAAA, Congress reasserted its goal to provide “clear, strong, consistent, enforceable standards” to implement “a comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination [Read more...]


Anticlimactically, DOL rescinds ‘persuader rule’

July 19th, 2018

By Pamela Wolf, J.D.
Nearly a year after being urged to do so by a 17-state coalition of Attorneys General led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Department of Labor has rescinded the so-called 2016 “persuader rule.” In November 2016, a federal district court in Texas entered a permanent, nationwide injunction, ruling that the persuader [Read more...]


VA doctor’s race discrimination, retaliation claims for facing peer review fare no better on appeal

July 19th, 2018

By Lisa Milam-Perez, J.D.
An African-American VA physician was unable to revive his race discrimination and retaliation claims alleging he was subjected to peer review on a patient case while white physicians involved in the patient’s care were not, and subjected to review on another patient case in retaliation for filing an EEO complaint about the [Read more...]


No USERRA claim for adverse action against military spouse; forced resignation after husband’s deployment not unlawful

July 18th, 2018

By Marjorie Johnson, J.D.
An adverse employment action against a military spouse is not a basis for liability under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), a federal court in Ohio ruled in tossing an employee’s claim that she was forced to resign from her telecommuting position after announcing she would be moving from [Read more...]


Nursing home manager not protected by whistleblower law may still advance public policy discharge claim

July 18th, 2018

By Marjorie Johnson, J.D.
A nursing home administrator who was disciplined and terminated following her written complaint concerning violations of state staffing regulations couldn’t pursue a claim under the Pennsylvania Whistleblower Law since the employer was not a “public body” and her allegations concerned an act of “wrongdoing” rather than “waste.” However, she plausibly alleged a [Read more...]