3 ms·
Food on site is intended to keep your employees on site. There's no other point. Every other employer provides meal stipends, which employees can use as reimbu
by peterwwillis 9y ago
Food on site is intended to keep your employees on site. There's no other point.
Every other employer provides meal stipends, which employees can use as reimbursement for meals (perk). They also get wider choice and variety. But then they're not in the office.
If you can't afford to build a kitchen, you provide a stipend and a website to order delivery from a rotating array of local restaurants.
Keep food on site, they stay on site, where they can continue to peer-bond, talk about work, and get back to work.
- mulmen 9y agoThere are company cafeterias and private restaurants and food trucks. Amazon does not force employees to buy food at Amazon cafes. The campus is just in a city where normal city things exist.
- WalterBright 9y ago> There's no other point. Having eaten at Google's internal cafe, it is most definitely a perq, and is useful for attracting employee candidates.
- eclipxe 9y agoperk
- WalterBright 9y agoIt's perq, short for perquisite
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoDespite that, "perk" is the generally accepted spelling. Sorry, English is weird.
- eclipxe 9y agohttp://grammarist.com/usage/perk-vs-perq/ http://grammarist.com/usage/perk-vs-perq/ "The accepted spelling for the abbreviation of perquisite is perk, usually rendered as the plural, perks."
- thesmallestcat 9y ago> Every other employer provides meal stipends If only.
- PhasmaFelis 9y ago> Every other employer provides meal stipends Ha, what? Is that what this argument is about? Are there people so deep inside the tech bubble that they think free onsite meals are a standard feature of employment?