7 ms·

>Cool, so start-ups lose a potential hiring perk to the incumbents. They could just do something similar to what colleges do: - increase salaries just a bit

>Cool, so start-ups lose a potential hiring perk to the incumbents. They could just do something similar to what colleges do: - increase salaries just a bit - but the increased salary goes to a food card - employees can't easily turn this into cash - you swipe it and "pay" - the company is essentially paying for the employee's food Money changes hands, but no one is at a net loss than what a free food perk would cost.

trendia 8y ago
This would make demand less elastic, pushing restaurant prices up for the rest of us.
- dunpeal 8y ago
  Absolutely. This will increase demand and raise prices.
hellisothers 8y ago
Problem is the employee is taxed on those funds AND those funds aren’t tax deductible for the employer like dine in (50%) or in house food (100%) so it’s nowhere near comperable.
- pyrale 8y ago
  It sounds reasonable that the richest industry/workers in the area don't get free perks at the expense of other taxpayers. Non-financial compensations are taxed in many countries, I really don't see what's wrong here.
  - midasz 8y ago
    You just summoned the libertarians haha
- sokoloff 8y ago
  Money paid to employees in this way is tax-deductible to the employer, same as the rest of the employee’s salary is. (It is worse for the employee, of course.)
Johnny555 8y ago
Would this card be used at the company cafeteria, or at local restaurants? If it's the former, then I think it's still "free food". If it's the latter, then it removes much of the benefit of the company providing the meal -- keeping employees on-campus and near their desks longer. I like my company's free food since it's easy to walk down the hall and eat a quick lunch between meetings, no need to take an hour to head off campus to a local restaurant. I don't care that the food is "free", but that it's fast and convenient.
- JetSpiegel 8y ago
  Convenient for the company.
  - Johnny555 8y ago
    And for the employees. I don't want to pack a lunch or go seek out a restaurant every day to pick up food. I know that eating at work means I'm spending lunch time in the office, but by spending less time at lunch, I can leave the office earlier. I'm sure it's a net-win for the company -- if an employee is in the office for an extra 15 minutes since they got a "free" lunch, then the meal is more than paid for (assuming tech-worker salaries)
s73v3r_ 8y ago
Why jump through all those hoops, instead of stopping at "increase salaries"?
- ThePadawan 8y ago
  Depending on legislature, it can be a win-win situation. Example: Currently living in Switzerland, which has "Lunch cheques" [0]. Employees don't pay income tax on their value, employers don't pay social security on their value, local restaurants/takeaways get more customers. [0] https://www.lunch-check.ch/en https://www.lunch-check.ch/en
  - seszett 8y ago
    That's a "win-win" if you just take these particular employees and their company into account. It's a net loss for the state and the rest of its citizens however.
BurningFrog 8y ago
The benefit of a company cafeteria is mostly that you don't lose half an hour walking to a restaurant, waiting in line, ordering etc. It's not about the money.
- a5seo 8y ago
  This. This is the giant disconnect between muni govnerment planners and tech. They literally cannot fathom that people in tech are trying to squeeze the most from every minute in the day. Just. Do. Not. Get. It.
  - B1FF_PSUVM 8y ago
    > squeeze the most from every minute Don't do that. It hurts. You.
    - isostatic 8y ago
      On a good day, I work about 5 hours a day. That's non stop, from about 10.30 until about 4pm, or from about 3pm to 8pm. If I stop for lunch, I stop, and don't get back into it. So I eat lunch at my desk. It's not bad for me. 10 hour days to accomplish half the work is bad.
      - zerr 8y ago
        You can split the work and do the rest next day, there is no rush, really.
        dantheman 8y ago
        There is rush. Tell that to people who die because medical technology is delayed years. Or companies that fail or never materialize because the products take too long to produce and are too expensive. Tell that to the farmer who's crops go bad. Not everything is the same.
        8y ago

trendia 8y ago

This would make demand less elastic, pushing restaurant prices up for the rest of us.

dunpeal 8y ago
Absolutely. This will increase demand and raise prices.

hellisothers 8y ago

Problem is the employee is taxed on those funds AND those funds aren’t tax deductible for the employer like dine in (50%) or in house food (100%) so it’s nowhere near comperable.

pyrale 8y ago
It sounds reasonable that the richest industry/workers in the area don't get free perks at the expense of other taxpayers. Non-financial compensations are taxed in many countries, I really don't see what's wrong here.
- midasz 8y ago
  You just summoned the libertarians haha
sokoloff 8y ago
Money paid to employees in this way is tax-deductible to the employer, same as the rest of the employee’s salary is. (It is worse for the employee, of course.)

Johnny555 8y ago

Would this card be used at the company cafeteria, or at local restaurants? If it's the former, then I think it's still "free food". If it's the latter, then it removes much of the benefit of the company providing the meal -- keeping employees on-campus and near their desks longer. I like my company's free food since it's easy to walk down the hall and eat a quick lunch between meetings, no need to take an hour to head off campus to a local restaurant. I don't care that the food is "free", but that it's fast and convenient.

JetSpiegel 8y ago
Convenient for the company.
- Johnny555 8y ago
  And for the employees. I don't want to pack a lunch or go seek out a restaurant every day to pick up food. I know that eating at work means I'm spending lunch time in the office, but by spending less time at lunch, I can leave the office earlier. I'm sure it's a net-win for the company -- if an employee is in the office for an extra 15 minutes since they got a "free" lunch, then the meal is more than paid for (assuming tech-worker salaries)

s73v3r_ 8y ago

Why jump through all those hoops, instead of stopping at "increase salaries"?

ThePadawan 8y ago
Depending on legislature, it can be a win-win situation. Example: Currently living in Switzerland, which has "Lunch cheques" [0]. Employees don't pay income tax on their value, employers don't pay social security on their value, local restaurants/takeaways get more customers. [0] https://www.lunch-check.ch/en https://www.lunch-check.ch/en
- seszett 8y ago
  That's a "win-win" if you just take these particular employees and their company into account. It's a net loss for the state and the rest of its citizens however.

BurningFrog 8y ago

The benefit of a company cafeteria is mostly that you don't lose half an hour walking to a restaurant, waiting in line, ordering etc. It's not about the money.

a5seo 8y ago
This. This is the giant disconnect between muni govnerment planners and tech. They literally cannot fathom that people in tech are trying to squeeze the most from every minute in the day. Just. Do. Not. Get. It.
- B1FF_PSUVM 8y ago
  > squeeze the most from every minute Don't do that. It hurts. You.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    On a good day, I work about 5 hours a day. That's non stop, from about 10.30 until about 4pm, or from about 3pm to 8pm. If I stop for lunch, I stop, and don't get back into it. So I eat lunch at my desk. It's not bad for me. 10 hour days to accomplish half the work is bad.
    - zerr 8y ago
      You can split the work and do the rest next day, there is no rush, really.
      - dantheman 8y ago
        There is rush. Tell that to people who die because medical technology is delayed years. Or companies that fail or never materialize because the products take too long to produce and are too expensive. Tell that to the farmer who's crops go bad. Not everything is the same.
        8y ago