You seem to be on the ball, more or less, with your career path. However, that you was a general you, not a specific one.
As for operators not hiring those who try out the short cuts, some are realising the problems inherent in doing this and are shying away from doing so. Others continue to chase the bottom line with little regard to the future of the industry. Getting operators to stand together on this probably has as much chance of success as getting pilots to do the same. That's about as credible as it gets. Beyond that lies restrictive legislation once things have sunk to levels where govt feels the need to intervene. Do we really need more interference because we can't get it right ourselves? Perhaps taking personal responsibility would be a start but too many people are getting into this as an alternative to four years at university, without adequate knowledge of what they're getting in to. The problem is further compounded by those people then buying ratings in order to sidestep the hard yards. Hopefully the system will prove to be self rectifying and the benefits of having easily disposed of crews who pay for their ratings will be outweighed by the cost of insurance, broken aircraft and lives when inexperience begins to show.
The original problem came about because of people trying to jump the queue by purchasing type ratings while not yet of a sufficient level of experience and ability in order to properly use those ratings. The operators latched on to and encouraged this as it freed them from the financial burden of training and bonding crews. This freedom meant that hiring and downsizing was easy as there was no consideration of losing money if you got rid of someone with the excuse that there wasn't enough work. A bond protects both parties, something yet to be realised by those keen to help erode the few decent terms and conditions left in the industry.