Oh they definitely became more aggressive with PIPs around 2013 and 2014. But then they were surprised that stock rised by 100%+ in that tome frame, so RSU based comp got really expensive. Not that this would have been a valid reason to PIP people in order to replace them with people on new contracts, but at least I get where they came from. Generally speaking, the 10/10/40/40 plan is fair. And also takes into account that most people leave somewhere between year 2 and 3 anyway, PIP or not.

Fun fact: timing internal transfers with review cycles, especially the mid-year one employees are hardly ever informed about, can avoid getting PIPs. In the first 6 months a new department doesn't review employees (at least didn't back the day) and in year one people don't get PIPs. So switching departments after the first full review, but before the mid year one, avoids being PIPed mid year. And the first end year review. The second end year review in the department hardly ever results in a PIP, so one can change again departments before the upcoming mid year review (the first with a real risk of being PIPed). Rinse and repeat. Took me too long to figure that one out so. In hindsight, I know quite a few people who managed to pull that off. Of course being part of a feed-back rings also works wonders.

They comp the difference in vesting schedule (against average) with a cash sign on bonus that pays out over the first 2 years. Your yearly comp is equal to getting 25% of the RSU value per year (plus the actual stock accrues value over this time).

Who gives a f about the comp plan? I'm on 5/15/40/40. The first two years are cash with bonus and then the stock vests in lieu of the bonus. I am making $275k and the stock has gone up 40% since I joined. And yet, if I stay through vest, it's like a $25k raise (9%). Why would they be incentivized to PIP me?

Plenty of people work here and get filthy rich. They stay because they create immense value at scale.

Sounds like sour grapes to me. I doubt you'd pass our interview.