TCX actively sought out many pilots from many airlines that have recently failed and they are now on the payroll. What TCX want, quite rightly, is a broad spectrum of experience in the flightdeck. This caters for FO/CP ratios, retirements, etc.
In the UK, there have been low-hours pilots being mentored by an airline during training and then going on to fly airliners for decades. It's not the new 'cancer' some suggest it is. Yes, the T&Cs of previous schemes were substantially better than those of the last couple of years or so (pay-for-a-rating, pay-to-fly, etc.) but this scheme represents a shift towards more investment from the airline, which is, I think, a step in the right direction.
I agree that BALPA should be stamping on paying for ratings and, more so, on the ridiculous practice of paying for line training/flying but too many people on these forums lump pay-to-fly with low-hours pilots. Yes, low-hours pilots are those paying to fly but not all low-hours pilots are paying to fly.
Are you suggesting, though, that BALPA should be discouraging new pilots from joining the industry (through reasonable, fair schemes)? Note: we don't know the financial details of this scheme just yet so can't classify it as a good deal or a p***take but it looks like it might have the potential to be fair deal, with give and take on both sides...