I find that it is too often the case that decision makers of large organizations use the company's expense of providing medical benefits and payroll as a bargaining chip during a negotiation.
It goes something like this:
You should agree to a lower than asking salary because we are providing payroll and medical benefits.
We can come closer to your asking price by hiring you as a contractor but you'll have to pay medical benefits and payroll (taxes) on your own.
Is this fair? how much more expensive is it really for a company with 100+ employees to provide the expected?
What is a good rebuttal for this during a negotiation?