About Us  |  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.

ABC independent contractor test from Dynamex applies retroactively to franchisee suit against Jan-Pro

May 3rd, 2019

By Ronald Miller, J.D.
In a case that sent shudders through the California employer community, the ABC test adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court for determining whether workers are independent contractors or employees under California wage orders was applicable to a class claim filed by workers for a [Read more...]


HR rep’s testimony that he followed advice of counsel waived attorney-client privilege

May 3rd, 2019

By WK Editorial Staff
In a case presenting “a thorny issue of attorney-client privilege” in the context of internal investigations, the court found an employer waived attorney-client privilege as to conversations between an HR representative and in-house counsel.
Although communications between an HR representative and in-house counsel about decisions to discipline and terminate two employees were privileged, [Read more...]


Medical condition that ‘caused’ officer’s memory loss of her first warning might be covered disability

May 2nd, 2019

By Marjorie Johnson, J.D.
She adequately alleged that the memory-loss symptoms could manifest on more than one occasion and that because she had been working as a police officer without incident, she could perform the essential functions with or without a reasonable accommodation.
An African-American police officer who was terminated from her position with the U.S. Capitol [Read more...]


Despite supervisor’s denigrating comments as to his cancer diagnosis, Dollar General employee was fired for policy violations

May 2nd, 2019

By Kathleen Kapusta, J.D.
Although an employee pointed to supervisor comments, disparate treatment of coworkers, pretextual justification for termination, and suspicious timing, a reasonable factfinder could not conclude he was terminated due to his disability.
Denigrating comments by a Dollar General regional manager regarding an employee’s cancer diagnosis, together with the threat to watch him work “until [Read more...]


Former supervisor’s statement as to why employee wasn’t promoted improperly excluded as hearsay

May 1st, 2019

By Kathleen Kapusta, J.D.
The 2011 amendment to Fed. Rule Evid. 801(d)(2)(D) did not add a requirement that the declarant maintain the same scope of employment at the time the statement is made; the Rule requires only that the statement be made during the existence of the employment relationship, stressed the court.
Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D), [Read more...]