Dirty Sanchez:
The industry has managed to sleep walk into a state where being a "good" pilot has less to do with stick and rudder and more to do with managing a computer (sh!t in,sh!t out).
Dirty- If I wanted to talk to "the industry" about this, who would I call? Kinda reminds me of the notorious "They" who are at the heart of every dysfunction in the military, but when I would turn to the section of the phone book for the letter "T", I can never find "Them". Probably because "They" are really "Us", individually and/or collectively.
Will a finding of "low proficiency in conducting a hands on visual approach" as a cause of this mishap result in the pilots' unions publicly demanding that their members be required to do visual approaches a minimum of two or three times per month to maintain proficiency? Or will the unions fault ATC and airport officials? Have the unions ever struck for higher standards or more rigorous training to be imposed on them? Or are the pilots not "Them"?
Fortunately, mishap investigators are not in the "blame game", but are tasked to make a technical investigation that identifies causal factors. Eliminate the cause, and you don't get the effect. Unfortunately, when human factors are involved, humans don't like being identified as the cause. Rather, we default to the, "you don't understand" mode, or "the other guys made me do it." Knowing that an aircrew will "carry this burden for the rest of their lives" does not provide me with the knowledge necessary to avoid their errors - assuming that I am willing to admit that I am also capable of such errors.
Thus, we see a hodge podge of comments that may or may not shed light on what is wrong.