I feel people may have missed my point somewhat. Everyone seems to have read that post as if I was saying integrated cadets were better pilots than modular students. I urge you to re-read this and perhaps it will become apparent that this is not what I meant. Just to emphasise the point about the training record and its merits over what is likely to be a fairly sporadic report from other flying schools (although I am assuming this).
I wasn't comparing the training records of ex-mil pilots to those of integrated cadets just simply to the low houred GA pilots. My post was simply addressing that of turbines directly. I agree it is an unfair situation and I have been lucky.
I perhaps worded it badly, I won't edit my original post as I have seen on here how that allows people to change their arguments casually. Perhaps I should have said that this was 'one of the reasons'.
It is indeed a shame some are willing to work for peanuts but others have put plenty of input into this argument so will leave that to others.
If anything, I don't give a good view of the integrated schools - rather them being a place where people fear to maintain their perfect records or risk the waste of the premium paid to join such a course.
I am sure the majority would have enjoyed the training more doing it differently, the reality is that many cadets will have often found it a bit of a chore.