Litigation Value: Surprisingly, despite the free-flowing shots and porcupine quills, the legal risks associated with the most recent Dunder Mifflin Sabre holiday party ultimately proved to be relatively low. What “holiday” am I referring to? Well, just ask Stanley.
If only more employees could be like Kevin — not wanting to put anyone out, while content to sate themselves with apple cinnamon and maple brown sugar (in one bowl, with whole milk). But alas, at this time of year, many of us have watched co-workers (over)indulge other appetites.
In Pennsylvania, where our favorite paper company (occasionally) conducts business, Section 4-493 of the Liquor Code makes it unlawful to “permit any liquor or malt or brewed beverages to be . . . furnished or given, to any person visibly intoxicated.” Long before Oscar relieved him behind the bar, Robert should have known that Erin and Meredith had reached (or exceeded) their respective limits. But to the credit of both him and Andy, the company’s upper management — such as it is — saw to it that the most impaired team members made it home safely. Call it a best practice.
Of course, if the CEO had given the receptionist more than a chaste, curbside hug, or if the Regional Manager had allowed an intoxicated employee to drive her minivan full of “valuables” home, we’d be looking at the situation in a different light. As it is, the potential workers’ compensation claims flowing from some vigorous air-guitaring to Mannheim Steamroller (or was that Trans-Siberian Orchestra?) are probably manageable.
By the way, have I mentioned that our blog has once again made the ABA Journal‘s annual list of Blawg 100 nominees? We’ve been down this road before, and our always-a-bridesmaid status can be upgraded only if you and those to whom you recommend us get motivated. If it earns us a few more votes, then allow us to endorse Andy’s words of wisdom from the break room: “Be yourselves, have fun, and try not to let it affect your work.”