I can't argue with a vertical training program to train people who have been specifically recruited for a company training program, that makes total sense as with a cadet program they have gone through a genuine recruitment process and you have selected the people that you want to come work for you. You can always teach flying skills to someone and if you the customer has control over the standard of training then you will undoubtedly get the what you asked for or at least you know exactly the standard to which that person can fly "enough to pass the test".
Equally I think that it's a bit far fetched to suggest that the product produced by the integrated schools is any more impressive than a well rounded, well trained person coming through the modular program, the difference is that you have zero control over the standard of training and you also have zero control over the level of experience so in effect you have no yardstick of how to judge this pilots flying skill or capacity at the non-flying aspects of the job as well. This in effect is probably why modular guys are somewhat ignored by the large airlines because the amount of work required to find out if any of these thousands of CVs relates to someone useful is disproportionately large.
I've met several instructors who were a long way short of being employable so it's incorrect to say that all 1000 hr instructors are great but those who are employable are really great to fly with on a personal level. This may be more just my experience of course.
With integrated students you have a known quantity, they can fly well enough to start learning and can do the basics of what you require so all you need to figure out is what they will behave like in the job.
It's about "good enough to do the job". Truthfully that's what most employers want, but it does raise a question about how well rounded those people will be when they swap seats.
I did the MCC/JOC at OAA and there was heaps of automation but we decided to hand fly as much as possible because that's what's in the RYR assessment and what the course is there for is to get you through a sim assessment
in a high performance aircraft. You get the real multicrew stuff when you do the TR and Line training. Learning to achieve the lesson objective while hand flying the aircraft was a far more difficult task and ultimately led to better understanding of what's going on. We did do the automatics stuff when it was required by the lesson but encouraging the students to constantly put the AP on suggests the instructor felt a lack of ability in hand flying that might distract from the course material
.
What I also learned there was the basic flying skills of even the good cadets was pretty poor, they were excellent at flying with automation and getting the SOPs but give them something unexpected wind or wx wise then there was inevitably a panic. It unquestionably had something to do with the training they received in the US which sounded truly appalling. This may have been isolated but the stories I have heard from a reasonable number of ex students over a period of time would strongly suggest otherwise
.