This is not true for all tech companies, including FAANGs. For some (many?), the first grant is all you are entitled to, and subsequent "refresh" grants are based on performance, manager discretion, or other non-guaranteed criteria. Hence the "4 year cliff" many people complain about.

True. I was talking about Meta specifically (but failed to be explicit about that).

The refreshers at Meta are mostly mechanical based on your role and level, and they’re allocated in dollars even though the grant is converted to shares at a specific date.

I imagine the dollar amount will get lowered over time as the stock price falls though.

Otherwise the company is creating a lot of dilution for shareholders. e.g. to reach the same dollar amount requires more shares. And Meta is already crashing explicitly because their operating costs are out of control and outpacing their earnings growth

But that would just be pragmatic, they may not actually be doing that.

Good management in this situation would be refreshing grants only for the top half of performers and letting the others choose to leave, IMO

not in most companies they arent