Query to Working Lawyers: Is It Professionally Acceptable to Drink at Lunch?

With apologies to Scheherazade Fowler, I have a question for practitioners: What do you think about drinking at lunch?

Sometimes? Never? Only with friends who are known to be fellow travelers? Does it matter that people used to do it in decades past? If so, why did the world change? Are we truly living in an era of "neo-prohibition"?

As for me, if I drink at lunch I risk falling asleep in the afternoon. So unless I'm staying put at the bar all day, I try to stay away from the evil stuff until the early evening. Especially if I have an appointment in court.

Comments

[Kevin]

I was just reading something that says the brain is more alert after drinking alcohol and less alert after drinking coffee. So I am now requiring that all lawyers have a drink before discussing any matters with me.

Also, how can 1-2 at a client lunch hurt, especially if the client is imbibing?

[Naked Drinking Coffee]

What are the rules on law students drinking during lunch? Before class? Before class at 9:30 AM? Will the professor still respect me if I tell them in slightly slurred speech that they "are awesome as hell," that "I love [them]," and that "I just want things to work out between us because we're not that different?" Inquiring minds want to know.

[david giacalone]

Where I live, the only lawyers drinking at lunch seem to be the old-timers whose secretaries do most of the work anyway (and who are definitely not allowed to drink at lunch). Maybe lawyers who continue to bill clients after drinking alcohol (morning, afternoon or evening) should post the results of a breathalyzer test alongside each itemized billable hour.

[Beldar]

Only after finishing a trial (win or lose) or other major event when you're taking the rest of the day off.

[Dave!]

"I am now requiring that all lawyers have a drink before discussing any matters with me."

Gee, I always *assume* that a lawyer has just had a drink before discussing matters with me... ;)

[David Giacalone]

And, after, Dave! !

Euphemism Question: Why do we -- lawyers who should know how to say what we mean -- say "drink" at lunch when we mean drinking alcoholic beverages?

I confess that I drink at each meal.

[Evan]

Summary of foregoing: It seems that only Beldar answered seriously, although his answer suggests that the only time he takes an afternoon off is after a trial or other "major event." So he gets both the Sober Lawyer Award and Hard-Working Lawyer Award.

David's mention of "old-timers" suggest that times have indeed changed. If so, however, we must assume that Kevin's clients are all old-timers.

If times have changed, I suppose we can have faith that the Youth of America, as exemplified by Naked Drinking Coffee, is doing what it can to change things back.

Finally, as for David's "euphemism question," I can confidently answer that "drinking" to refer to consuming alcoholic beverages is not a euphemism but an accepted definition of the word. Perhaps "I've had a few" might be a euphemism, but it's more likely to be a lie.

[david giacalone]

Evan, Seriously speaking, I think it's often irresponsible for a lawyer to "drink" and then continue working. I'm sure the same people who refuse to believe that a drink (or a cellphone conversation) affects their driving will insist that a drink does not affect their ability to provide competent and diligent legal services. Perhaps giving clients notice of such habits -- and following the client's wishes thereafter about BUI [billing under the influence] -- would be sufficient in most instances.

As to the language used: the frequency of the use of the ambiguous terminology does not keep it from being a euphemism, nor keep me from wondering why society feels the need to be vague, despite the ambiguity that is causes, or why lawyers wouldn't be a bit more precise. (Similar comments could be used for terms like "knowing," "dating" or "sleeping with" someone or being "in a delicate condition").

Our friends at Wikipedia say: "Drinking is the act of consuming a liquid through the mouth, almost always largely consisting of water. . . . The word drinking is in particular used as a euphemism for the consumption of alcoholic beverages, with the word thirst being the corresponding euphemism used by alcoholics for alcoholism."

[George Wallace]

Evan, various Daves and Davids, and all assembled,

I have to concur that times have changed: when I started out in the early 80's, the Three-martini lunch was by no means a rarity among Los Angeles attorneys, at least among the insurance defense bar. Partners would regularly gather their under-lawyers, often their paralegals, and occasionally a secretary or two, and consign themselves to a favorite corner of a leather-encrusted booth. "And put it in a bucket!" was the battle-cry of one partner I knew then, still in practice now. (He is not a regular lunch-imbiber any longer, so far as I know, in part because nature punished him with a case of gout.)

A regular feature of those lunches would be repetition of long-established anecdotes about the prior generation of litigators -- in the vein of "there were giants in those days" -- who would win resouding victories at trial even after literally falling over during a closing argument. These stories seemed at least somewhat credible at the time, but that is perhaps attributable to the haze through which we heard them. (A literal haze, since there was plentiful smoking in restaurants in those days as well.)

By the turn of the 80s into the 90s, it was still gnerally acceptable to have an inebriating beverage over lunch with a client, if the client was the instigator. This was referred to as "marketing," an activity now taken over by sober-sided weblogs. Quantities consumed at mid-day had definitely fallen off by that time from their Reagan-era peak, and wine had largely replaces whiskeys, whiskys and clear grain-based alcohols as the quaffable of choice.

By the mid-90s, le dejeuner buveuse [drinking lunch] had gone entirely out of fashion, and was seen as less of a sacrament and more of a symptom that the participant must definitely be watched and was perhaps not to be fully trusted. Interventions abounded.

In those early gin-soaked days -- which I witnessed while still under the influence of being young and therefore immortal -- we hardly ever saw or experienced an impairment in the drinkers' afternoon performance. I have no doubt that this was a sorry illusion.

A santé!

[Evan]

David: George’s great comment got in the way of my response to you. Here it is: I still don’t agree that my use of the word “drink” in the title of this post was a euphemism for something else. According to Merriam-Webster Online, for example, the second definition of the word “drink” is “to partake of alcoholic beverages.” That’s what I meant. I wasn’t inquiring about whether it’s professionally acceptable to get drunk while working. Most of us would agree that’s not okay, assuming we care about our professional reputations.

I think you’re suggesting that the term “to drink” is a euphemism for “to become drunk.” You might even be suggesting that terms are synonyms. If I’m right, that’s just fuzzy thinking on your part. But others would agree with you. In Illinois, for example, there are signs proclaiming that it’s illegal to “drink and drive.” But it’s not really illegal to drink and drive. It’s illegal to drive while you’re legally intoxicated. Those who use the word “to drink” like it’s used in those signs have hijacked the word, inverted its real meaning, and caused confusion to reign.

My solution? Say what you mean. “To drink” means to consume alcoholic beverages. If you drink long enough or fast enough, you might become “drunk." “Drinking” and “being drunk” are different terms, not interchangeable and not synonymous.

Is anyone on my side? I know the restaurant-and-bar lobby is. They stand with me in saying that a drink now and then is not a grave sin. My question remains, however (although I think George answered it): Is drinking now considered unprofessional?

[dangerpants]

Are you kidding? If you don't have a couple at lunch, you lose your buzz from breakfast.

[Jeremy Richey]

I am not a lawyer, so perhaps the perspective of one on the outside looking in would be helpful. (But I am law student, so I am not completely on the outside). If I needed an attorney, and I saw my advocate kicking one back during lunch, I would not hire her. I would also lose respect for her. Now, I am a teetotaler, so take that with a grain of salt. I think the point I am trying to make here is that at least some clients will lose respect for you if they see you drinking at the wrong time, and correspondingly will not hire you. Futhermore, they may tell others not to hire you. But, perhaps this group is so small that it will not make a difference to your bottom line. In that case, bottoms up!

[Rufus]

I've written about this topic myself, here. I agree with George, the practice has certainly fallen out of favor. And I can recall one particular instance where a client witnessed this behavior of the lawyer my post was based on and he stopped getting work from that client. As an in-house guy I get taken out by lawyers for lunch quite a bit, if they're from out of town and merely in to visit without anything pressing on the agenda, I probably wouldn't think anything about a glass of wine or a beer, but if it was an important lunch meeting where a problem case was the topic, I would probably be taken aback by their decision to indulge. Of course if they break out the Vicodin and Xanax, it's binge time baby. Yeah. Sorry about that. I have issues.

[david giacalone]

Evan, When you say "unprofessional", do you mean "unprofessional-unprofessional" or merely not professional?

As a member of the "plaintiffs'", "consumer", "trial lawyer", "p/i" lawyer bar, I presume you are not equating "unprofessional" with undignified or tacky, but -- as usual -- I need a special Legal Underground Glossary when attempting to understand what's being said, asked, inferred at this site -- my fault of course, as I have not yet learned how to read minds through cyberspace (especially without the aid of emoticons).

No, I was not trying to say that "drink" always means in excess when it refers to alcohol consumption, but that is one of the major definitions of the term in many dictionaries (both as a noun and a verb).

However, I am still puzzled why a wordsmith like yourself would use a very general word, that denotes the consumption of any liquid beverage in a way that refers to imbibing a much smaller subset of beverages. [Naturally, I am aware that the percentage of alcoholic beverages consumed by some folk may be even more than the "standard one-third".] Here's what OneSource.com sets out in its Quick Definition of the word "drink":

http://www.onelook.com/?w=drink&ls=a
Quick definitions (Drink)

noun: the act of drinking alcoholic beverages to excess (Example: "Drink was his downfall")
noun: a single serving of a beverage (Example: "I asked for a hot drink")
noun: any large deep body of water (Example: "He jumped into the drink and had to be rescued")
noun: the act of swallowing (Example: "He took a drink of his beer and smacked his lips")
noun: any liquid suitable for drinking
verb: take in liquids (Example: "The patient must drink several liters each day")
verb: consume alcohol (Example: "We were up drinking all night")
verb: drink excessive amounts of alcohol; be an alcoholic (Example: "The husband drinks and beats his wife")
verb: be fascinated or spell-bound by; pay close attention to (Example: "The mother drinks in every word of her son on the stage")
verb: propose a toast to (Example: "Let's drink to the New Year")

I promise, this is my last Comment on this topic. Let's all drink to that.

[OLS]

My rule is: not unless you don't need to work that afternoon. Doing random admin duties like filing, or clearing your desk, is not included in my definition of "work" in this context.

I find that my concentration goes if I have even one beer at lunch, so that's why my rule.

Most of my colleagues will have one though, if we're going out to lunch. As long as it doesn't happen on a regular basis or affect your ability to earn your pennies that afternoon, I don't see a problem with it.

[Evan]

OLS: I'm not sure others will automatically know you're writing from Australia. You say, "Most of my colleagues will have one though, if we're going out to lunch." Is that the Australian way?

[Rupert]

I am not a lawyer yet (law student in Australia), but my father is a partner in an English corporate law firm. From what I understand, drinking (in moderation) at lunch with client is still pretty common, and perhaps even a key part of forming a rapport with your client. I would imagine, however, it depends on the client. If they're not drinking, you probably should not. Equally, however, if they order a bottle of wine and offer some to you, it would be impolite to refuse. If they order a bottle of wine and make it clear they intend to drink it themselves, you should perhaps worry.