Bay Area cities are cracking down on free food at Facebook and other tech cos

Post by hellisothers » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 12:15 AM UTC

inostia wrote: post #23

htmlfan wrote: post #3

This can definitely help support local business. But seems unfair to lower-salary employees. As an employee who used to have free lunch and now doesn't, I have felt the financial effects. Dining out truly can make a big impact on the wallet- $10 dollars per meal (unlikely in Mountain View unless fast food) x 5 meals a week x 48 weeks a year (let's be generous and assume you get that much PTO) = $2,400 annually Compan…

There's nothing stopping the companies from providing a dine-out per diem if they choose to. They could for example form relationships with local eateries to subsidize those meals either in full or through discounts, which would support the local economy but also provide that benefit to employees. But of course it's cheaper for them if they control the entire operation.

Post by vkou » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 4:39 AM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #36

vkou wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a contractual agreement, that Facebook agreed to, in exchange for allowing the office to be built.

You can't just put any arbitrary restriction in a contract that you feel like, particularly not when the party imposing the restriction has the coercive power of government or quasi-governmental entities on its side. The classic example of this is the old-school homeowner's association covenant that forbade selling your house to people of a certain race.

Post by walshemj » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 8:53 PM UTC

jazoom wrote: post #13

htmlfan wrote: post #3

This can definitely help support local business. But seems unfair to lower-salary employees. As an employee who used to have free lunch and now doesn't, I have felt the financial effects. Dining out truly can make a big impact on the wallet- $10 dollars per meal (unlikely in Mountain View unless fast food) x 5 meals a week x 48 weeks a year (let's be generous and assume you get that much PTO) = $2,400 annually Compan…

Everywhere I've ever worked, >90% of people bring their meals to work >90% of the time. This sounds like another of those special microcosm "problems".

Post by walshemj » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 8:56 PM UTC

juli1pb wrote: post #40

vkou wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What baffles me is the perspective that: "Because can't fix these problems, everything that does is stupid and useless."

Also get your data: if you don’t have free meal, you bring from home. This is what the vast majority does. And at the end of the day, this is a matter of freedom: if company X decides to offers free meal, what’s the problem? It creates jobs and attract people! Is this the country of freedom or this place incompetent administration wants to control what companies and people should do?

Post by nickthemagicman » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 1:58 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #31

nickthemagicman wrote: post #4

Does this seem a little like bit of gov't overreach? They're saying a business can't provide food to their employees? Am I missing something?

You are missing something. This restriction was made, in exchange for letting the office be built. They could have asked the Zuckerberg to do the chicken dance, for 10 minutes, in exchange for letting the office be built, if they wanted to.