Okay....if as you claim our present compensation methodology punishes 'older' hires....than can we assume you also maintain it 'rewards' younger hires?

Or is everyone getting screwed?

And given your 42 year longevity model were in place, could not a 50 year old new hire, with only 15 years of incremental adjustments before retirement make the same argument you are now articulating?

That it is a compensation model that 'punishes' older hires?