I feel that the author has missed that a person's contributions to a company varies with time — driven by both personal changes (like parenthood or health) and

I feel that the author has missed that a person's contributions to a company varies with time — driven by both personal changes (like parenthood or health) and environmental factors (new technology, changes to market demand, automation etc). A person's worth to the company is also entirely independent to a person's average worth to an industry. I don't think you can fairly judge whether a person's salary is merited without taking into account all the specifics of a person's role, their present life conditions, and how the business is operating. Also, this kind of model is destined to drive salaries down. I know I'd be upset if my salary dropped at the whim of averages. I like that my salary remains constant, even if the business is going through a slump, and I like that I can make the case for an increase if I see it going through growth. It also completely ignores that sometimes people salaries are set to attract new talent. Particularly if that talent is being poached from a competitor. Sure, may not seem fair, but all employment and remuneration is about circumstance anyway.