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.

Here's someone who did the math on providing meals to Motorolans: http://www.businessinsider.com/it-will-cost-google-95-millio...

$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.

.. or stay with the company longer. Consistently high-quality food, available that conveniently, is a primal attraction.

> 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).

No not really. It might make sense in a campus office, perhaps, but in central Manhattan it just seems like overcontrol.

So would giving them an $7200 raise. But this raise has no tax, and saves the staff time & money, so it's worth more than the $7200 to the staff.

the patent department at Motorola will