Still, many employers may instead conclude that those employees still turning up to work can be satiated with bulk deliveries from food apps like Uber Eats. They had been trying to eat the caterers’ lunch even before the pandemic.
"They had been trying to eat the caterers’ lunch even before the pandemic." Here, they refers to the employees, and the caterers to restaurants behind Uber Eats. Am I right? Please share your opinions on this after you read the short article.
I vaguely recall reading this article though I don't recall which issue it was in.
To "eat {someone else's} lunch" means to defeat someone else in (usually commercial) competition. It is a common idiom used in business books, especially books on sales, such as "Eat Their Lunch: Winning Customers Away from Your Competition".
In this case it is not a reference to the restaurants behind Uber Eats, but rather to catering companies, as mentioned in the second sentence.
Previously if a company needed to put on food for its staff (for example if they were working overtime, or having some kind of regional conference), the company might hire caterers to deliver and set up food for the employees, whether on an ad hoc basis or as part of on-site cafes.
Uber Eats is trying to eat into that market (no pun intended... OK, maybe a little pun intended) by replacing caterers with its own deliveries. That means that money which used to go to the catering companies will go to Uber Eats instead. Uber Eats will thus metaphorically "eat the catering companies' lunches".
