The reality is that RSUs are a better deal because of the unlimited upside. If my RSUs go to zero, I jump to another company and reset my cost basis- there is actually little risk here beyond the first year lock up.
That's effectively an implicit call option. You can buy an explicit version on the public market.
The question is "Is the cost of an explicit call option greater than the cost of finding a new job?"
There is some benefit in that with an explicit call option, you have to pay up front, while with job switching, you only incur the cost if the implicit option "expires worthless". But that's balanced by the fact that with the implicit option you're exposed to sector-wide risk (eg, see the current tech-wide turndown), while you're not with the explicit one.
Pretty much. Also with the call option you have to pay the premium (and possibly the rollover cost if for some reason you wanted to match exactly the equivalent RSU schedule), on the other hand if the stock price goes down at worst you lose the premium, while the downside with RSU can be much larger.
In practice it would be foolish to invest a large part of your salary in call options of the company you work for. But for the same reason RSUs are also similarly risky and you should always prefer cash and diversify your risk instead.
Edit: If you buy an at the money call and sell the equivalent put you can reduce the premium and replicate the risk profile of the RSU. But I'm not an option trader.
