[cm277]

It's just as likely (more so, given this is Google) that management is looking for a _visible_ sign of cost-cutting to pass a message to staff that times have changed, so chilling effect on raises/bonuses and probably increased attrition (which is more cost-effective than down-sizing and doesn't make headlines).

I am sure their finance people can read the expense %ages just as well as HN commenters: e.g. changing your cleaning supplier to a much cheaper one could actually save more $$$ but will not be staff-visible for a while. Perks are mainly signals, not cost centers.

Source: led down-sizing and kept perks when I wanted to retain people, reduced perks where I preferred some additional attrition.