The optional lunch-and-learn is starting to feel mandatory

Every Wednesday, our department hosts a lunch-and-learn from noon to one.

The calendar invitation says optional.

The invitation also tracks attendance, includes a note from the director about “showing curiosity,” and generates a follow-up list of people who did not join.

I attended the first six sessions. Some were useful. Others were product demonstrations unrelated to my role. Because the meetings happen over lunch, I ate at my desk while listening and returned to work without a real break.

Two weeks ago, I declined a session so I could walk outside and call my mother. During my next one-to-one, my manager asked whether I was disengaging from department learning. I said I had missed one optional event. He replied that no single session was required, but a pattern of absence could affect how leaders viewed participation.

Optional now seems to mean that attendance is not ordered, but absence still needs a defense.

The department has other learning time. We can attend training during the workday with manager approval. Nobody questions whether those sessions replace lunch because they are scheduled as work. The lunch series exists in a strange category: important enough to influence reputation, but informal enough that the company does not protect separate break time.

I do not want to start a campaign against shared lunches. Some coworkers enjoy them, and I may attend when the topic is relevant. I object to using the word optional while quietly treating attendance as evidence of ambition.

I am considering asking the director to clarify one of two rules. Either the sessions are optional and nonattendance carries no performance meaning, or they are expected work time and employees should be able to take a break elsewhere in the day.

My manager thinks that framing is too rigid. He says workplace culture depends on people choosing to participate without everything becoming a policy.

Choice only works when no is one of the acceptable choices.

How would you raise this without making a weekly lunch sound like a major injustice? What signals turn a voluntary workplace event into an unofficial requirement?