<p>i'm interviewing for both companies as field engineers. What do you know about these companies and these jobs? I'm aware that the hours are pretty intense, around 100 hours a week, 7 days or more straight sometimes.</p>
<p>But the salaries are about 100k?</p>
<p>Which is the better company to work for? I heard baker pays more...</p>
<p>i am a petroleum geolgist with a natural gas producing and exploration company. </p>
<p>both halliburton and Baker Hughes are Petroleum Service companies, so we use their services and I am familiar with both.</p>
<p>first, both are good, respectable, well known companies. So either would be fine.
second, the field engineer jobs are often remote, and hard, but lots of responsibility.</p>
<p>I would say that Halliburton is slightly more international than BH, bu both have large domestic and intenational presence. </p>
<p>I would actually say that more important than the company is the job or position. For example, A wireline engineer is more likely to work 24/7 than a hydralic stimulation engineer...</p>
<p>what groups are you looking at</p>
<p>i'm looking at logging and mwd engineering</p>
<p>i'm actually leaning toward not going into these fields anymore. the lifestyle and the remote locations are not worth it for me</p>
<p>logging and mwd are the areas I most interface with, for others out there the work is interesting and lots of responsibility .. but the location and lifstyle are different,
For wbb---you seemed to have done a good job of research</p>