I actually said age was a discriminator between people in the same class. I suppose that, if hiring at some airline was constant and evenly spaced, age would be the only factor influencing career progression. But in the real world of boom and bust, there seem to be very big hiring pushes, spaced far apart. The more patches of hiring are spread out, the less important age becomes.

In the example you cite, I think you actually make my point. When the second guy gets hired, by virtue of the example you laid out, you are comparing two 38 year-olds.

The senior of the two guys is 8 years earlier in getting hired. For those eight years, all he has to show is a difference in longevity for pay and benefits. But both get to exercise roughly the same bidding power. Both get their widebody transition at the same time, both get to the left seat at the same time. Both retire at the same time. Youth gets the senior guy... nothing special.

It's hard to compare total QOL and career earnings between the two, but it's undeniable they both will fly roughly the same equipment, for all their career at the major. Now, the junior guy was probably senior at some regional for the eight-year gap between classes, which maybe wasn't that great. Then again, the senior guy was the plug at his airline, which maybe wasn't that great either.

Now, you can play different variations on the theme. I will agree that age plays a role, but it seems to me that the standard deviation in terms of age is not that much, especially when compared to the length of the career. I think the guy that gets hired early is much better off, for much longer, than the young guy that finally gets to move up for a few years after older guys retire.

I'm one of those younger guys. I got hired late in the push, but young (8 years below average), and I've been doing the math a lot. What I get to do in the last 8 years of my career is a nice consolation price for my furlough, and the relative slow movement I will see until those old ba$t@rds finally get out of my way.