Taken to its logical conclusion, the airlines will try to crew the plane with pilots with the minimum legislated qualifications and paid as little as possible, all in the name of reducing costs.
That's not at all a logical conclusion, nor an informed one.
Airlines don't seek out inexperienced pilots. Some airlines pay little, and that's all they can get. Inexperienced pilots seek out any job they can find. For what some airlines pay, all they can get are inexperienced pilots. That's a relative thing, however.
If you're in much of the world, an inexperienced pilot at the regional level would be one with a few hundred hours. For many years, save for recently, in the US an inexperienced pilot would be one with four thousand hours or less. To get hired for a long time at the lowest rungs, one needed twenty five hundred hours or better. In recent times, pilots were getting hired with three hundred hours. This is not the norm. Certainly not in the US.
Presently we're hiring pilots in the 15,000 hour range. Why? Because we can get them. Like any company, we would prefer to find the most experineced, qualified pilots we can. We're not a regional, but we're also not a legacy carrier, either.
Hours, of course, mean nothing. Experience means everything. More to the point, what the individual pilot takes from his or her experiences, mean everything. Do you know enough to be able to interpret the qualifications of a pilot, and his or her capability, from looking at their hours? If so, then you need to leave whatever job you presently have and seek work in the human resources department of the finest carrier you can; your skill is unique and rare.
Perhaps you'd like to give the pilots a simulator check to determine if they will pass the standards you set.
Would you know what to look for?
If you get to choose me individually for the flight, does that mean I get to review your background and qualifications to fly, and decide if I want you on my flight?
The airline has already evaluated each pilot. Each pilot must undergo regular recurrent training and evaluation. I'm undergoing such evaluation myself, at the moment. I am watched very closely by check airmen who monitor me for safety, good judgement, accuracy and skill in flying, emergency procedures, aircraft knowledge and understanding, policies and procedures, and standardization. The smallest mistakes, errors, omissions, or items that could be improved upon are noted, repeated as necessary, and training is given. If I can't fly, if there's doubt as to my safety or ability or judgement, I'm not allowed back on the line.
Are you more qualified than these check airmen and inspectors to make this determination? Are you more qualified and able to decide who is able, than those professionals with a full career of experience and judgement, who make these decisions and observations every day?
It somewhat negates all that professionalism, training, and experinece, to have passengers with no training or experience making the decisions.
"Ooh, I like him."
"No, I won't fly with him. His chin is crooked."
"That one looks devious. Let's wait for a younger pilot."
"Hang on, that one's too young. Let's wait for one that's older."
"That one's got to be a vegetarian. I don't trust vegetarians. He probably doesn't have enough judgement to make that flight. Let's wait for a meat eater."
"This one says our pilot was a fighter pilot. He's only got seven hundred hours, but he must be good. After all, he flew fast."
"That one was a crop duster. Let's not trust him."
"Here, this is the one. Nice tie."
Perhaps you'd best leave professional evaluation to the professionals, and stick to choosing a window seat.