Prism: Firstly, sorry for putting something incorrect on here - I understood that it was basically experienced crew that were being recruited: I stand corrected. I'll say it again in bold:
sorry. You said:
the main crew however are mainly from none airline jobs and for many it is their first time on a aircraft.
I guess you have the numbers to hand. What proportion are experienced crew and what proportion have no experience? IAMFI.
Secondly, if I was making a mistake about who in BA was last to leave the aircraft, it was reflective of Count's statement. I was surprised by his attitude suggesting the crew's responsibility was limited once they were on stand. He's one of your colleagues, by the sound of it, not mine. You've already implied he was incorrect - well, it was what he said that rattled my cage.
People have the right to live where they choose, and yes, airlines are better for employing native speakers of the languages of the customers they serve. However, can you not see that it's a bit of a privilege to be able to live a longhaul flight away from where you work? Especially if you are likely to get upgrades. Is this a taxable benefit? Do you do anything to offset your carbon footprint? If I work for a foreign company, I normally expect to live where I work, and at best get holidays back home - not commute. That is considered normal in the real world.
Finally, it's unbecoming to use pompous language if you don't know how to use it properly. I'm pretty sure what you meant was "the fact that somebody hasn't flown before won't prevent them from being successful." Is that correct? And just to point out, this last paragraph is not meant altogether seriously, which is why I am putting this evil smiley here --->
