This thread is fascinating. If you ask yourself how you are paid relative to the peers you graduated with from college , be it 2 years , 5 years or 10 or 20 or 30 years ago; the vast majority of you will say you are paid a lot more than your peer group. Maybe we need to ask HR to make CL levels of 24 1/3 , 24 2/3, 25, 25 1/3, 25 2/3, 26, 26 1/3, 26 2/3, 27 ... etc. This way, all whom grew up in the “everyone’s get a trophy 3 times a year for club swim, soccer, and softball/baseball teams” can feel validated on an ongoing 3-4 time a year basis. It is embarrassing to see the drivel of the colleagues on this website whom think CL is a metric, a high ranked 26 can make more than a low ranked 28 as salary bands in a given CL are hugely dependent on rank quintile and YEE (years of experience). The post from kir+197 seems a good barameter for those looking for a calibration point.