The modern aircraft is now so clever, able and reliable that pilots have come to trust it. This trust runs from the manufacturer, through the airlines, their training departments right up to the line pilots. The trust, allied to control laws which prevent exceedances, means that very few crews will ever had to deal with an aircraft throwing a very basic "hissy fit". Simulator sessions will be dealing with complex failures involving hydraulic systems and their effect on LDA's, electrical system malfunctions, bleed problems and so forth.
Then, when we add prescriptive SOPs regarding autopilot usage we start ending up with pilots who forget how to fly. Then, when challenged, they revert to what they know and what has always worked for the last so many years. I regularly fly by hand, but I've witnessed first hand my own skills being degraded over time. I'm not as good as I used to be when I flew a simpler aircraft. Our SOPs (which are the manufacturer's) make the mouth music for hand flying so complicated that many choose to avoid it. I just get them wrong, but at least I'm having a bit of hands on time. But from what I can gather, I'm an exception. Our long haul colleagues rarely hand fly. They cite fatigue, SOPs, complicated airspace, etc. as reasons for not doing so.
I am also fortunate that we spend time in the sim hand flying. But I feel better with more time and more unpleasant failure scenarios. But that costs time and money, neither of which will be spent willingly until we are persuaded to do so. Maybe pilots (ladies as well as men) who fly highly automated aircraft should be forced to fly piston and turbo-prop twins part time? More basic flying is one if the answers, but I'm sure other things could be improved.
PM