Yes, I think Kefuddle is reading 'standardisation' as something akin to 'mass production'. Standardisation is the backbone of all military and airline training, and ensures that for a given set of circumstances, certain operating procedures will be followed. Standardisition is absolutely fundamental to safe, predictable operation in a multi-crew enviornment. There is no room for 'artistic impression' in an airliner!
The military system is proof, if any were needed, that low-time pilots are perfectly capable of handling and operating high-performance, high-workload aeroplanes. However, there is the major difference between military and civil training in that the trainee military pilot handles complex, high-performance machinery from a very early stage (my very first aircraft was a jet). That's achieved through ongoing type-specific groundschool and simulator training throughout each phase of the course. As you can imagine, such thorough training is extremely intensive and expensive - and takes around three years. As a result, a military pilot will hit his first squadron with 300 hours or less - at a cost of £7 million plus! Yet the RAF would not consider this individual as a truly rounded, useful squadron pilot until the end of his first tour - another three years down the line. It's unlikey that any private-venture school could afford to imitate this kind of training, hence the low-hour pilot will need some years of further training within an airline before he's ready to assume command.
Standardisation in no way implies a downward threat to pay and conditions. The currently increasing trend of airlines to apply pay restrictions on low-hour pilots partially reflects the fact that these pilots have not undergone the 'apprenticeship' that was alluded to in a post above, and the fact that a 250-hour pilot with a type rating is in no way equal in usefulness to the company as a 2000-hour senior(ish) first officer. It also partially reflects a desire by these airlines to minimise the costs (and inevitable risks) that are inherent in taking on such pilots.
In the past an airline pilot would have completed either many years as a military pilot, or perhaps many years working through the air taxi, night freight, commuter airline etc., or would have joined an airline through a cadetship that involved (in BA's case) a couple of years as a cadet, followed by up to seven years as a second officer, before he achieved the (then) dizzy heights of first officer, with somewhere around 3000 hours. The relatively high pay accorded an FO on appointment in those days reflected the long road to get there. Now, it would seem, many not only feel that they deserve the seat at 250 hours, but they think that they justify the pay as well. Sorry, but it ain't so - and these latest schemes effectively acknowlege the fact that you are a trainee for some years after you join.