This article seems to rely on a BS miscalculation?

If you chose an earlier decade and followed a fixed group of workers around they would not barely beat inflation in a year. These workers have 1 year more experience and in earlier decades that has been very different than if you replaced a new entrants with other new entrants to have the same experience level in the samples at each time.

If you take the average calculated and apply it as the outcome for every year for these workers to their retirement then I think they would all be among the lowest career development group in any earlier generation.