Lupin,
Personally, I don't want to live abroad, it doesn't fit in with the rest of my life. So for me, if I was going to move abroad because of a job, it would have to be very very special.
In those terms, BA wouldn't qualify.
However, given that at least part of your reason is that you would like to experience living abroad anyway, then the relative importance of the job quality would decrease.
I.E. if you came to BA, and ended up
not liking it, at least you could move jobs again and say that at least you'd had the experience of living in England for a few years. So, yes, why not go for it. As I said, BA does have some good points, in particular the pilot community are generally a good bunch regardless of their reputation (apart from the occaisional miserable bloke like me!)
I guess I was concerned that you might be thinking that BA was so excellent that it was to be followed at all costs. I just would hate for someone to go to all the hassle of relocating to a foreign country, and then end up not enjoying the job.
Whatever you decide to do, good luck.
CPB
NW1,
I am quite happy with the concept that my exerience and opinion is 180 degrees removed from yours and that neither is right or wrong - but I felt it important to express it nevertheless. I make no apologies for that, and moreover I do not imply any character defect in those who don't agree. Even paranoia.
Sorry, NW1, but I don't think you are. You could have simply said something along the lines of 'Actually, i don't agree with pit bull, BA is fine', but instead you choose to characterise my opinion as being based on sour grapes, and therefore by implicationnot based any sound reasoning.
If BA is the party which is so mismanaged, then how come your employer was taken over?
Hah! ROFL!
A purely hypothetical situation. Any resemblance to any real situation is purely coincidental:
Party A starts a small airline with half a dozen people chucking some cash into a pot, and getting a bit more from the city. A few year later, they have built up a small but successful airline operating some 24 aircraft with another batch of jets on order.
Party B are a large flag carrying airline, with a substantial turnover but wafer thin profit margin.
Party B expresses an interest in purchasing Party A's company. The city sees a chance to gets it money back with a *very* substantial return.
The deal is done. Party A head of into the sunset with bulging wallets.
Party B, on the other hand, proceed to destroy their new purchase. Without going into details, after 18 months all the aircraft have either gone or are scheduled to go, many routes have been axed, most staff have been gone, those that remain are largely angry and demotivated. To put the final cherry on the cake, management are quoted as saying that the 70 million spent buying the company was a total waste. This makes the remaining staff, that represent the *only* thing that Party B has retained from that purchase, feel particularly valued (not).
Which group is better managed then NW1?
I respect your opinion; please respect mine.
You're perfectly entitled to hold an opinion, however if that opinion is that BA are a well managed organisation then expect me to rubbish it on a regular basis. Maybe your part of it is, I wouldn't know, but it certainly isn't universal.
Guess Lupin had better hope he is posted to your fleet not mine, eh?
CPB