GE: Truly Imagination at Work, as Long as You're Willing to Work 80 Hours Per Week for Low Pay
Pros
I work in the Aviation unit out of Cincinnati. As a world leader in the manufacture and sale of aircraft engines, the unit has many best practices that become evident as you work for the organization over time. That said, the people are incredibly smart, hard-working and know what it takes to ship a quality product. If you are willing to put in long hours at times, and are motivated by the mission of creating dependable, high-quality aircraft engines, than this might be a business worth considering in your future career. Further, as a globally recognizable brand, being at GE allows you the professional flexibility to expand your workscope into one of many industries and across many companies -- after working at GE -- if you so choose. Beyond the name recognition, if you choose to stay in-company, the large conglomeration of businesses under GE Corporate allows you to have many different career opportunites while staying within the same umbrella. This i turn lends itself towards benefits such as being able to literally travel the world and work at various sites, within GE.
Cons
First and foremost, GE as a company likes to get the most work out of its employees that it can for the amount they pay you. This means two things: first, it means that you may be required to work incredibly long hours -- including nights and weekends -- to get the job done. It also means that your pay probably isn't going to be competitively comprable to colleagues in other companies. This is the payoff you choose when you enter one of the largest companies in the world. Another issue is that GE is at best inconsistent about employee recognition for hardwork and innovation: This is contrary to the stateed culture and purported focus of managers. I have seen numerous instances where managers have blatently overlooked great projects done by colleagues -- in one instance, the CFO of my division neglected a large cost-savings project because the project corrected a problem the CFO had originally created earlier in the year, and the officer didn't want a spotlight on a problem that was his fault.
