1) I'm pretty sure this is how various levels of public service work. Pay below market rate, but offer extremely good job security. As a result, many people sti

1) I'm pretty sure this is how various levels of public service work. Pay below market rate, but offer extremely good job security. As a result, many people stick around and form long-term relationships. Where I can see this going poorly is when personal disputes bleed into work situations. I've worked with people whom I have disliked working with, but loved hanging out with, and vice-versa. As long as there is respect for the reason you are there (i.e. to work), it's not so bad. 2) I've never worked anywhere with free food, so I don't know if that would change things, but have worked at places with a full-service cafeteria, a lunch/break room, and no break/lunch room. The place that only had the lunch room seemed to have the most socialization, with all levels/types of staff bringing their lunch and chatting as a group. Even people who didn't bring a lunch would still pop in. Surprisingly, no real cliques ever formed (even people who came, sat and never said a word seemed very welcome). The cafeteria workplace seemed to only attract those who needed to purchase food. Though, it did seem like more of a social place around morning coffee break (again, mostly people purchasing coffee). The place without a lunchroom pretty much had everyone either eating at their desks or leaving for lunch. I found this pretty abysmal and I'd classify myself as an introvert. Compared to the lunchroom situation, I certainly knew less about what everyone actually did in their jobs, so it really was a net loss even in terms of productivity. 3) That's a hard one. I think it's okay for people to be left out if they choose to, but I think if your culture relies on cliques, then it will eventually drive out anyone who doesn't fit (and I'm sure at some places, that's seen as a positive).