It does seem like there could be a breaking point.
Are they really going to stick to treating everyone to the same perks? The ones they use to compete for engineering talent in Palo Alto?
I would keep it up if it up to me, knowing that the cost is a long-term investment in internal corporate identity. Once you cut back on these things (such as Microsoft's formerly-gold-plated health plan) you've permanently become a more ordinary company.
$20 per employee per day doesn't seem like such a huge expense, especially compared with salary and office space. If it makes employees happy to stay at the office longer, it's not a bad plan.
> Consistently high-quality food, available that conveniently, is a primal attraction.
It also ensures that the employees won't leave the office premises for the lunch break. That could be a good thing (for the employer) or a bad thing (for some of the employees).
Are they really going to stick to treating everyone to the same perks? The ones they use to compete for engineering talent in Palo Alto?
I would keep it up if it up to me, knowing that the cost is a long-term investment in internal corporate identity. Once you cut back on these things (such as Microsoft's formerly-gold-plated health plan) you've permanently become a more ordinary company.
Here's someone who did the math on providing meals to Motorolans: http://www.businessinsider.com/it-will-cost-google-95-millio...