If you can detect a famished feel to this editorial — weak in content, stretched out and barely recognisable from its two sturdier and meatier counterparts above it — then you’re a more sensitive reader than you think you are. The fact of the matter is that this editorial has been written on an empty stomach and by an impoverished head. But according to a 2005 report published recently, it seems that we are not alone in our denial of lunch. It turns out that for 63 per cent of more than 1,000 KFC workers surveyed in the US, the ‘lunch hour’ is an urban legend. In America, 55 per cent of employees take 30 minutes or less for their lunch break — spending 14 per cent less time for a lunch break.
The culprit seems to be too much work, instead of fulfilling food, on the plate and greater productivity demands. America, being America, is also seeing an increasing number of companies coming under legal fire for their ‘lunch, what’s lunch?’ policy that they slyly encourage. Last year, a California jury awarded more than $ 172 million to more than 10,000 Wal-Mart employees who claimed that they were denied lunch breaks.
In Europe, of course, there is no such professional fasting ritual. Lunch hours are usually longer than the nominal 60 minutes — but then unemployment figures could partly explain a civilisational trait. As for us, hungry and barely able to type out these words, the midday meal is a luxury that we forfeit for your pleasure. Food stains on our keyboard? Don’t be cruel now.