[craig_asp]

Every time someone (usually someone from HR) tries to point out how great a company is because of its great perks like awesome couching sessions (not actual training), great team-building events, the best coffee machine ever, table tennis, etc. and how these somehow compensate for a subpar salary offer, I tell them: you just pay me well, give me more time off, and I'll handle all that myself.

[mathattack]

It’s amazing how many people don’t realize that the Beyoncé concert in the office comes from the same pool of money as compensation. (The company only does it because it’s cheaper than bonuses) And everyone showers Instagram with photos of the show.

[SyzygistSix]

Was that a real thing or was the Beyonce concert hyperbole?

[gmueckl]

Don't know about Beyonce, but it's pretty common for big companies to organize private concerts with big names for their employees. I guess it's a case of just spending enough money to make this happen.

[corty]

It is pretty commmon in departments such as sales, trading or marketing as incentive to e.g. invite $singer upon hitting the years sales target. Or organize a short holiday, visit to a sports event, fancy dinner, something. Seems to spill over to engineering or the whole company in some places.

[xtracto]

As a previous engineer manager this sucks . While sales people get all kinds of bonuses for doing their job. The Engineering team gets a pat in the back because nothing broke down.

[ccmonnett]

On the other hand, sales people are quickly dismissed if they don't meet their goals; it's a double-edged sword.

[SyzygistSix]

I'd have to say that I would prefer the pat on the back to what most bosses consider good entertainment.

[cptnapalm]

Not really related and I don't know about Beyonce, but during the dot com bubble, a company called Pixelton had a party with KISS, Tony Bennett and a reunion of The Who. They went bankrupt.

[dmalik]

At BlackBerry we had Aerosmith, Van Halen, and U2 on different occasions.

[mathattack]

In hindsight could that money have been better spent?

[mathattack]

Real thing. Banks hire politicians for meetings, tech companies hire celebs.

[danpalmer]

This is true, but I'd rather have an office with tea/coffee, a drinks fridge, etc, than the extra salary that the company is spending on providing that.

In part I'm paying 40% in tax so if I'm going to buy coffees it's actually more effective to have them provided by the company. But in general, that sort of convenience and benefit is often worth more than the monetary value.

Tea/coffee in the office is very different to a expensive social events, but it's all on a spectrum, and I value some of those things more than the money. I do however earn a good salary, this could well be different for many others.

[lelanthran]

> In part I'm paying 40% in tax so if I'm going to buy coffees it's actually more effective to have them provided by the company. But in general, that sort of convenience and benefit is often worth more than the monetary value.

I actually started of my working career as a factory worker (nightshift, 12 hour shifts, seven days a week). It was customary to bring along a flask of coffee and a packed lunch.

Right now, even though we have company-provided coffee, I'd rather they just give me the money to bring a flask of my own coffee.

It's more convenient, I get to make a trade-off between quality and cost as the situation calls for it, I get to switch coffees if I need to.

In current reality, though, you are correct - overall it's cheaper for the company to provide coffee instead of giving you the marginal cost of the coffee you consume. I just wanted to provide an alternative viewpoint.

[danpalmer]

I completely agree – this all depends on the company, the people, the environment, everything.

I just think that saying "just give me the money" in all cases is a) not necessarily efficient, and b) glosses over the idea that a benefit can be worth more to people than the monetary value.

It can also be worth more to the employer! The UK government don't provide tea/coffee typically because it all ends up on public record and there's a perception that the media will be outraged if the government spent £10k on tea bags, even if that might be a perfectly reasonable expense across tens of thousands of employees (made up numbers, not important). The result is that in some offices you get contractors being paid £800 a day taking a 15 minute break to go down to the shop to buy milk for their tea, or to get a coffee from a coffee shop, costing far more than it would cost to just have some available in the office.

[wilsonrocks]

Tea and coffee ought to be a baseline in any office environment imo. I think it'd be worth it for companies to just pay for it, otherwise employees set up a tea club, spend work time doing it and fall out over it.

[jodrellblank]

Terence McKenna used to remind people that tea and coffee benefit an employer more than an employee - it's not a break to rest, it's an employer encouraged chemical stimulant to make you work harder. As an employee, you're hyped to work harder - which isn't necessarily a benefit to you at all.

That companies have then reframed it as an "employee perk" is a very slick PR move.

[ErikVandeWater]

I agree with the idea that many employee perks are actually detrimental to employees. But this one is pretty 50/50. I'm going to drink two cups of coffee every day no matter what, so employer-provided coffee benefits me. After-hours coffee I agree with.

[Viliam1234]

If the company puts too much emphasis on the free coffee they provide, it's a red flag. It means you will need it.

[wilsonrocks]

I've often thought that instead of an expensive coffee machine, ping pong table or playstation, I'd like a tea lady (or tea person as they would/should be called now)

[ProZsolt]

My previous company put emphasis on the free coffee, but it was a pretty chill place to work at.

[wilsonrocks]

Good point!

I was thinking of it more as the human right to a cup of tea (not meaning to belittle real human rights struggles)

[astura]

Interesting, there's no tea/coffee club at my office - my company doesn't provide tea/coffee/beverages, but does provide keurig machines. People either bring in their own coffee machines/coffee/french presses or they bring in their own k-pods. I am perfectly fine with it myself.

[anonymoushn]

I've never even worked at a company that could afford walls

[Rompect]

I agree completely. As someone who is a "loner", these "perks" of a workplace are actively an argument against it.

Just let me choose how and with whom I spend my time, thanks.

[cdogl]

I'm not a loner - I'm quite a social person - but I nonetheless agree. My work can be rewording and enthralling but it's also draining and it's full of people who I would (mostly) never spend time with outside of that setting. I've lost count of the number of retros / all hands over the years where people have bemoaned the breakneck delivery pace, change of priorities from above, chaotic management etc., and leadership have suggested team building sessions / coffee roulette / team lunches to boost morale. These days it just makes me switch off completely.

[Copernicron]

I'm with you. I may be an introvert but I'm actually quite social. The key for me is that I'm social on my own terms. Mandatory fun events and forced team bonding do nothing but alienate me from everyone else. The harder my manager tries to force me to be friends with my colleagues the more I refuse to.

[fernandotakai]

also, most of those perks are made to keep you at the office.

"oh you wanna play videogames/have a massage/play table tennis after work? sure! but you can't leave the office, which means you are accessible by everyone even after hours. and because you are not technically working, you won't get overtime. oops."

[ReactiveJelly]

I told my manager that if they want more than 40 hours per week, we can negotiate overtime. And considering my tax bracket, I'd rather be compensated with vacation days than money.

I don't understand why _anyone_ should be on a salary model of compensation. It doesn't feel like a privilege awarded to me as a middle-class white-collar worker. The privilege is the fact that I can tell my manager to stick it and I won't get canned immediately.

[myWindoonn]

As a lifelong salaryperson: Salaried employees don't work for hours, they work to get specific tasks done. If your work only takes 4hrs, then you get a short day. If your work consistently only takes 4hrs, then you work fewer hours as a lifestyle.

Of course, employers hate this, but the privilege of salary is being able to tell your manager to stick it to them on a daily basis by pointing to the tasks and showing that they're done.

[geodel]

> but the privilege of salary is being able to tell your manager to stick it to them on a daily basis by pointing to the tasks and showing that they're done

Maybe at some enlightened place. But all places where I have worked in last 15 years, if it is more that 8 hrs its requirement of job but when its less, one still need to be at office for at least 8 hrs.

The sticking part may be true for once in a while but on daily basis, I need to just suck it up and stay at office regardless.

[Graffur]

Do you have a method of seeking out companies that don't do this?

[teddyh]

> awesome couching sessions

Did you mean “coaching”? Or is “couching” some new SV term I am unfamiliar with?

[bregma]

I've seen videos of "couching sessions" on the internet. I don't think they're entirely work-appropriate activities for my line of employment.

[toxik]

A good couching session relaxes even the most stressed up worker

[lelanthran]

> A good couching session relaxes even the most stressed up worker

Depends on which side of the couch you are, I expect. The couchers (couch-workers?) probably do get stressed by providing couching sessions 8 hours a day.

[rexreed]

Sounds like an HR compliance issue

[fnord123]

Are you suggesting that HR get involved?

[SketchySeaBeast]

Now I'm certain I've seen a training video about this.

[Copernicron]

I got suckered by this once and only once. What seemed to be a great environment and culture on the surface, with lots of good perks, ended up being the most toxic and dysfunctional workplace I've ever been at. I was completely miserable and left in two months. I just couldn't take it. Ever since any office that tries to advertise how "awesome" they are by showing off all the trendy perks they offer immediately gets lowered in my estimation.