I knew someone once who had taken two years hard slog (while still working to keep himself and his family going) to gain his licence with 200 hrs. He had a 'rejection letter' from an airline saying "apply again when you have 1,000 hrs". He replied by saying that he had just spent a lot of money and time to gain his licence and was now at 'peak performance' and how could he be seen to be 'better' if he went to the USA to hire a cheap C150 to burn holes in the sky for another 800 hrs? He was invited for an interview and got the job. And was amongst the best pilots I have flown with. But I have flown with "200 hrs wiz-kids" off full time courses who could not think for themselves and flew like 'machines'.
Hours alone mean absolutely nothing. The 1,500 hr requirement in the USA is absolutely nonsense. But then it was imposed by politicians, who are clueless on any aviation matters (as the EASA FTLs prove so clearly).