This seemed extremely bizarre to me until I read the filing itself[1].
The RSUs in question are unvested. Apparently a change was just made by the board that means unvested RSUs will collect dividends which will be paid out upon vesting. Cook is declining those.
I can kind of understand that it would look strange to make a change like this to already-granted RSUs, but if it were that big of a concern, it seems odd that only Cook would decline the dividends, or that the board would have made the change retroactive in the first place, so I still don't entirely understand declining them.
The RSUs in question are unvested. Apparently a change was just made by the board that means unvested RSUs will collect dividends which will be paid out upon vesting. Cook is declining those.
I can kind of understand that it would look strange to make a change like this to already-granted RSUs, but if it were that big of a concern, it seems odd that only Cook would decline the dividends, or that the board would have made the change retroactive in the first place, so I still don't entirely understand declining them.
[1] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/320193/00011814311203...