Should promotion to captaincy be based on total experience including that gained prior to joining an airline so as to maximise the experience of the captains? Logical but I doubt that the idea would go down well with the crews of legacy carriers.
European national carriers have put low hour DEPs into the RHS since the introduction of the two pilot cockpit. Its generally considered that ab initio training schemes produce very high quality pilots. I don't know whether there is any statistical correlation between safety and the rate of growth of the aviation industry (which is the primary determinant of average experience). Safety rates have certainly improved since the days of high growth in the 60s but I suspect that there are other factors at work explaining this.
There are those who believe that the best pilots are ex-military (particularly in the US where the preference seems to be for ex fighter types). The recent 1,500 hour regulation in the U.S. includes a limited exemption for ex-military pilots. I've spoken to some senior pilots who would prefer lower hours ab initio trainees than higher hours ex RAF or Navy. (Note, I am not a pilot myself, my father was a military pilot for a time. Also I know that generalising is often not helpful.)
In some other areas there is often an preference for younger people who are considered quicker at picking things up. This is particularly true in I.T. (where in truth there is age discrimination). Might there be a conflict between older experienced flyers with better flying skills and younger guys who can find their way around glass cockpits quicker?