Companies that offer RSUs will always talk about them when discussing "total compensation" but if times got tight, it might be a thing they can cut without it affecting your salary. Then they can boast about how they didn't cut your salary. Actually, one year we got double RSUs instead of raises (when some companies were doing flat pay cuts), which was nice for a while while they were vesting, but now I am at a point where my salary could be 3% higher.
They usually have a vesting schedule, so even if RSUs are never cut and always a "fair" amount of your compensation, when you leave you will leave a lot on the table. At my company, they only fully accelerate when you retire at 65, and they accelerate one year if you retire under certain conditions (for me, I reach that at age 47). For early retirees, you will leave some at the table, and the longer you are there, the more that will grow.
For a similar reason, bouncing between companies that offer RSUs obviously becomes more questionable. But I would still want my new salary to compensate (or come very close to) my old salary plus RSUs before moving. This can be hard to know exactly because usually RSU grants when hired are treated differently than the yearly RSU grants that are given based on performance or however they do it.
The "cost" on the books also has a lot to do with the price they are issued at, so while 100 shares at $20 and 50 shares at $40 is effectively the same value, but the P/E on the shares when it was 20 could have been a lot lower (taking a simplistic approach at valuation). I would rather get the grants when the shares are undervalued but I have no control over this.
There is no reason to hold RSUs for any period of time since they are taxed when they vest as if the whole balance is income. You have no control over this event.
The stock could tank and make unvested RSUs meaningless to your compensation.
Basically, $$$ is superior to RSUs. I would rather think of RSUs as bonus money - something that is extremely variable that you should not rely on in your calculations.
However, depending on your retirement outlook, I don't consider jobs that simply pay more money superior unless you are looking at something as a short-term gig to put you over the hump. There are a myriad of factors that might make a lower paying job superior.
