Actually its not. They are getting the jobs that were always available to them and that preferred that type of pilot. Not flying heavy tin straight out of the packet but they are still jobs paying decent money. In fact some of them are on better money than the flexi crew type schemes and have a lot less debt if any to service.
And of course the largest taker of that age group of pilots will take both methods of training.
Only difference is one pilot has well over 100k debt to service and the other one significantly less.
+1!
Plenty of evidence to suggest that those who persevere and work hard (and with a bit of luck) make it, regardless of the method.
But to suggest to people that it is better doing an integrated course outside of a cadet scheme resulting in £90k debt is better than saving up less than half of that and having a license in your hand (by doing it modular), is just ludicrous IMO!
Even if someone could offer me a loan of £90k, I would never take it unless there was some sort of job guarantee. No thanks, I would rather save up for a bit and sit debt-free with a license in my hands, as opposed to a hold-pool and £90k down.
I am not against integrated. If money was no obstacle - sure, why not integrated. I think it really depends on what works best for a particular person in a particular circumstance.