That isn't a reasonable expectation. Morally speaking, companies should be expected to pay market rate for the job and anything above that is charity.
> That isn't a reasonable expectation. Morally speaking, companies should be expected to pay market rate for the job and anything above that is charity.
You're seriously equating the unlivable "market rate" with the moral choice? You've got to be trolling.
It's somewhat like FB being responsible for the A/C repairman being paid a fair wage by the HVAC company that Facebook uses to maintain the equipment in their campus.
Your HVAC worker who may spend 4 hours a month on the Facebook campus is different from someone whose daily job is to clean Facebook's headquarters.
I just don't see how the building that you work in defines who your employer is. There's lots of counterexamples for that.
If I own a business, and don't want to have expertise, training, etc, in food service, laundry, security guards, landscaping, etc...I should be able to get a company to do that for me. That company has expertise in hiring, training, regulatory compliance, etc. They are delivering that service to many companies, not just me. Their employees might even be transferred from one client to another. They charge me whatever the going rate for that sort of thing is. They then pay their employees however they do. If they are underpaying their employees, that's an issue, but not one that's my issue to solve. That is, barring some odd thing where my company, specifically, is using some unusual kind of leverage to NOT pay market rates for this service. I see no difference in whether that service happens on my campus or somewhere else.
Perhaps my own morals are jacked up, but something seems really wrong there.
It is more likely specifying things like how many people they have to feed, standards around variety of food, selection, etc.