That doesn't tell you whether it was the numerator or the denominator that changed.
Do you have a source for this? At other tech companies I'm aware of, the numbers are still much lower than 100%, even after threats of performance impact.
I think that is approximately L70 comp.
People in stagnant careers signal to their employers that they don't need to do anything at all to retain them.
People at a hot startup have all the options in the world.
Compensation isn't about what's fair at all. It's supply and demand.
You want to make more money? Make yourself in shorter supply and generate more demand for your service.
Bit of a flaw in your logic there ;-)
One reason is that retaliation is very possible. The opacity of the executive team was not a feature of Steve Jobs’s Apple, but the Time Cook-era opaqueness combines poorly withthe silo’d, top down nature of Apple’s management which _was_ inherited from Steve Jobs.
The opaqueness, I think, is a result of Tim Cook integrating the retail and corporate sides of the company; retail salespeople are treated better, but software engineers are treated a little more like retail salespeople.
Since the pandemic, Apple execs have seemed to be isolated in a bubble and are not listening to the rank and file anymore. The people they do listen to seem to be out of touch.
Make no mistake, if Microsoft is matching $10M PPU's with $10M Microsoft RSUs vesting over 4 years, every single employee will join. But I kind of doubt that this is their plan