It works both ways, for pilots and the companies.
As has been said, for a certain category of fellow pilots the T&Cs might still be attractive, most certainly the prospect of bigger tools to move. However there is some experience and aquired training involved ...... and even companies like ours are suddenly confronted with what they recruit, it might reflect on more upgrade failures, as described on another thread.......
Don't quote me wrong, nothing against the individual aviator, but I ask again: Where is the lowest acceptable limit? The erosion of the T&Cs at EK led to attracting predominantly lower qualified pilots, and now they reap what has been sowed.
It might seem nice and attractive in the beginning but if the upgrade does not happen when these newbees expected it, they start complaining. However once they eventually passed it (with enough experience and training) they will realise that it is not as easy as it seems to work with nice, young and eager collegues who lack the basics for this kind of operation. And they will complain again .....
Once more: The quality and safety of operation, its smoothness and average requirement of training is to a huge extent dependant of the T&Cs offered for pilots and trainers. Not even the EK stingyness can alter that, it's like a natural law and trying to defy it just cost MORE money. There have been more than ample examples to prove this theory, it's not mine.