Yes, 1500 hours in that case. Even then that simply represents the minimum number of hours required for ATR (ATPL) issue. It’s likely nowhere near the average experience level to be invited to an interview. In the U.K. it used to be possible to undertake remunerated flight instruction with a PPL and an instructors rating. Indeed that was how a lot of “self improvers” acquired the flying experience to provide the stepping stones to CPL/ATPL issue and then the entry level transport jobs. Most other countries required a CPL (Commercial) for all forms of remunerated flying including instruction. In reality these requirements were not worlds apart as an instructors rating required a minimum experience level of 100 hours and with the advent of JAR (later EASA) harmonisation, the CPL requirement raised it to 250 hours. However, this was one of the “stepping stone” pathways. Airline entry at 250 hours was only ever achieved through one route. That route was “approved” (by the regulator) full time courses of integrated study. These approved courses were offered by only a few schools who were either wholly owned (such as Hamble to BEA/BOAC later British airways) or affiliated to a handful of commercial airlines.
These “approved” schools trained pilots to a CPL with a view to fast track airline entry, not dissimilar to those same programmes you see today. Outside of these programmes, the minimum hour requirement for a CPL was 700 hours and an ATPL 1500 hours. As I have already mentioned, an airline job at even these base levels would have been very rare.
The changes that came with JAR also occurred at around the time the first of the “lo-cost” carriers came on the scene. One notorious CEO at the time was (however seriously) advocating doing away with co-pilots all together! Since that was obviously a non-starter the next best thing was to find the cheapest option. So opened the floodgates of people who felt that a basic 250 hour licence however obtained was the new normal. Usually it wasn’t!
Over the last 20 years you see on these forums the waves of aspirant pilots who thought a 250 hour CPL however obtained was their invitation to the cockpit of a 737 or A320. For most airlines who operated their own cadet programmes, they could tie those opportunities to the modern versions of the old “approved” schools. Not only that, but they could also gradually shift almost all of the risk/training cost burden to the aspiring pilot.
The old “approved” school courses of 200 hours of integrated training have evolved, but broadly remain what they were in the 1960’s. The MPL was constructed to significantly evolve these programmes into much more integrated airline ab-initio apprenticeship programmes. The intention failed to realistically appreciate the commercial volatility of airlines as the businesses they have become. Their future evolution needs to address the ability to change airline end consumers more easily than it has been.
Beyond these programmes, and the clue is in the name, the ATPL really needs to become the baseline qualification for airline employment. This is what has happened in the US albeit for likely the wrong reasons. Generally, a 250 hour CPL should be but one stepping stone to airline employment not the final hurdle. Save for those specific programmes, it never was, and in more recent times it has become a distortion that sets up a lot of unrealistic expectations.