I'll be honest, if you were the hiring manager at my company, you would be the first one out the door. Although experience is awesome, new people always come in ready to work, and they always present fresh ideas. When I hire, I don't really consider their length of employment as much as I do their skills. And, to be totally honest, I'd prefer to hire someone with 1 or 2 years of experience in my industry as compared to someone that had 25 years. The person with 1 or 2 years is usually more flexible and ready to learn, whereas the person with 25 years will always expect things to operate like their last job. I would be curious as to why someone with 25 years hasn't taken the initiative to learn something new. I realize that sometimes people only have one skill, or they just get comfortable with doing the same thing everyday. I've always had better luck with people who had 1-3 years in various jobs, even non-related jobs, because they have learned a lot of different skills and a lot of different ways of getting things done, and hopefully they'll bring some better ways of doing things to my company.
If you are not considering people simply based on their length of employment, you're probably hurting your company more than helping it, and may explain why you have a crapload positions to fill.