They also set out how they've paid the value of these benefits to employees instead, and have started a profit sharing plan. Looks like a better deal to me?
humor a speculative question for a moment: would the "better deal" have been to give employees the option of how they'd like to receive their fringe benefits versus a one-size-fits-all edict, so that those with less tolerance for the volatility of profit sharing can enjoy a bit of stability with such fringe benefits if profits decline?
Especially after, as another commenter mentioned: the tax implication of cash payout?
That you interpret the cash value as being identical shows you trust management over the employees, who this actually effects...