BA vs EK is not what we should be pursuing here. The reason why BA was included has already been explained. It is not to say one is better than the other, but to highlight salary is not the sole reason for retaining or attracting new employees. The thread drift into tax does have some bearing as it effects net pay. That, ultimately, is what we see in our accounts. If they're advertising on UK radio, it may effect those intending to remain 'residing' there.
Rex
Some of the shorter layovers are indeed difficult and 24hrs is never the easiest rest period to use. However, the shorter layovers are desirable for some pilots, myself included, as it means more time at home rather than on layover. I also believe that BA too has a few back to back US trips and have less restrictive scheme rules than, say, 20 years ago? As for the bunk time, it's 75% credit on 4 man ULR's. You get all of the 'operating sector' and half of the 'augmenting sector'. All of it's paid but 25% is not credited as flying hours. Can't say I agree with it though.
4468
If you're referring to my post, perhaps a re read might be in order. I never included the education allowance into the 70k dirhams figure. This is because there may be some pilots without need for such an allowance. Those that do have their children privately educated would have just over £15,000 per year, per child. With 3 children, that's £45,000
NET per annum. For a UK higher rate tax payer, that would have to be some income to come out with that figure each year. As for the accommodation allowance, yes, it was included. It's £40,000
NET, also per annum, that the Company gives you for moving out of free housing and doing what you and most other pilots do, pay a mortgage on your own property. Or you can stay for free with all bills and utilities covered. At least there is a choice.
However, the current standard of concentration style campus probably isn't a patch on your own Country estate in York!
And no, I'm not being facetious, I really do mean it!