If you’re an employee (key or not) in a company that’s encountering financial trouble (and you aren’t as financially set for life as you desire), you should absolutely understand what options you realistically have and determine if a conversation about your comp is indicated to ensure that your current company keeps your services. It doesn’t have to be a threatening conversation.

“Look, I’m trying to understand our outlook and my financial prospects, given that Google is actively recruiting people like me and it looks like all of our stock options are now worthless.”

You’re not entitled to be “paid back” for the fact that those options became worthless, but neither are you obligated to stay going forward for just the cash portion of your comp if you have clearly better [job] options elsewhere.

> You’re not entitled to be “paid back” for the fact that those options became worthless

I absolutely agree with this, and this is why I think the retention bonuses paid out to executives are unethical. If you can tell your employees that they aren't entitled to a compensation fix because their options/stock are now worthless, it's a bit hypocritical to turn around and tell your board/shareholders "hey, my options and stock are now worthless, give me lots of cash or I'll leave".

Just because you may have the leverage to do something, it doesn't mean it's ethical to do so.

As I discussed in another post. I was just an IC at a failing company and I was able to get a retention bonus. At the next company I worked at, I found out later that the team leads were given a retention bonus because they knew everyone was looking.

If you are in the tech field, you have the “leverage” to make anywhere from twice to five or six times the average salary. Do you take advantage of it?