It could also be because everybody got an 18% raise across the board. This is an under-researched topic in employment statistics and I would love to see a better understanding of cause and effect behind wage discrepancies in union and non-union positions.

> a few rockstars make $100k

My problem with this narrative is that I have never worked somewhere where the "10x rockstar" was actually that, or wasn't also toxic in some other way. All we have here are competing versions of anecdata about high-vs-low performers.

I also take issue with the reverse causation you seem to imply - that somebody making 60k is a low performer. That seems to assume that companies are good at actually identifying performance and compensating fairly for it.