4 ms·
So about $480 a week per employee? What kind of perks are they getting? Now for a rant. I know perks are suppose to help make companies attractive to potential
by mruniverse 10y ago
So about $480 a week per employee? What kind of perks are they getting?
Now for a rant. I know perks are suppose to help make companies attractive to potential employees they are trying to woo and boost morale. But I think it's crazy when I see the perks we get, while at the same time have to go begging for a mobile device to test on.
- rodgerd 10y agoI'd certainly take 480 a week over 480 a week in perks.
- whack 10y agoEveryone says this. Problem is, no one ever talks about how much money they make. So when Dropbox bumps up your salary, you feel slightly happier in isolation, but it doesn't improve the company's visibility in any significant way. Contrast this with perks. When Google starting giving all their employees free food, it only cost them $100/week/employee, but everyone talked about it, and how awesome Google's perks are. The amount of positive PR and word-of-mouth that they got out of it, far dwarfed any efficiency improvements they might have gotten by simply giving their employees a slightly higher salary.
- mrgordon 10y agoThe employees also don't pay taxes on the perks so it costs less than giving you the money to buy the things yourself
- the-dude 10y agoIn the Netherlands, about everything besides coffee is seen as non-monetary compensation and is subject to income tax. Even lunch.
- notmything 10y agoI'm sure the cost of setting up the kitchens (capital expenditure) and the cost of keeping them running (operation expenditure) negate this saving. Are there any published figures?
- mrgordon 10y agoWell that brings a few other factors in as well. 1. The company can depreciate capital expenditures and deduct their costs from income whereas the employees would not reduce their taxes by doing a kitchen upgrade or going grocery shopping 2. The employees will spend more time at work because the kitchen with free prepared food is there instead of at a restaurant or their house so it technically doesn't even need to break even to be advantageous for the company
- notmything 10y ago1. This reduces the overall cost by some small percentage but I doubt it actually makes it free 2. In theory this is correct, are there any studies that actually show productivity gains for companies in this respect? (I think the real reason for this is because a lot of the valley companies are in the middle of nowhere and therefore it's not really feasible for employees to go looking for food). I recently visited the HQ of my company in Silicon Valley and I was not impressed by how far it was from everything else.
- bad_user 10y agoYet as an employee you can't redirect that money towards education, health-care, paying bills, holidays, buying gadgets or providing for your family in general, you know, things that actually matter. So you get an open bar on Friday and massages. Wow. Awesome!
- Trundle 10y agoOpen bar + unlimited guests was mentioned. I also believe I recall a stat that providing food service in SV is about $20 per person per day.
- tyingq 10y agoThey are probably also including things like health insurance, vacation time, sick days, in that figure..."perks" that aren't really perks per se. My guess is that for just about any tech software startup the only really meaningful cost is salaries. In a pie chart, it would dwarf everything else. Even lease costs for an extravagant office would be minuscule in comparison.