Poster: A snowHead
|
The TOs could always pay for their staff to get qualified. I suppose that would go against their 'burn and churn' recruitment policies though as it would require an investment in staff to be paid back over multiple seasons.
I think they all insist on the minibus drivers having a driving licence (even if only a car one), so it's not too much of a stretch to ask the guides to have a bit of paper saying they passed a guiding exam.
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Alastair Pink, Thanks for pointing that out. For some reason I thought Cornish Pasties would be under the meat products alongside Melton Mobray pork pies.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
albinomountainbadger, a guiding exam to be able to show someone around a few pistes? Crikey, I'd better get some guiding lessons for my next trip.
Even I can do that in most resorts after 4 or 5 days skiing there. An exam is ridiculous, and for TO hosting it would be laughably straightforward or excessive for what they need to know.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
pam w wrote: |
I doubt whether it'll make much difference one way or another. I believe that St Anton bans ski hosting too (and there are very few independent British ski schools in Austria, in part for protectionist reasons) and the Italians have also done a fair bit of chasing of their own, as has been reported here on Snowheads, but that doesn't stop lots of people wanting to go to St Anton or to Italy, because they have other strong points in their favour. Most skiers in France are French, so they'd probably not be too sorry to have fewer Brits around, anyway. |
It is banned in St Anton but not Lech even though they are on the same ski pass.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Mistress Panda, so why require taxis to be licensed or the drivers to take route knowledge exams (London etc)? It's just driving around a few roads isn't it?
You're missing the fundamental point that this is a job, not a leisure activity; professionals are held to higher standards (the clue is in the name).
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
AFAIK Blue Badge is professional association, not a licence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: |
albinomountainbadger, a guiding exam to be able to show someone around a few pistes? Crikey, I'd better get some guiding lessons for my next trip.
Even I can do that in most resorts after 4 or 5 days skiing there. An exam is ridiculous, and for TO hosting it would be laughably straightforward or excessive for what they need to know.
|
You don't think checking someone meets a minimum ski level, has some knowledge of mountain weather and hazards (altitude, sunburn, frostbite, etc.), has half-decent communication skills and knows how to get help in an emergency would be sensible? Not to mention being able to assess other people's skiing ability well enough to choose appropriate terrain?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Several things:
1) the SCGB guides do have some training / qualification (of sorts) and they still seem to be in the same position as the TO's guides.
2) somebody pointed out to me that there is too much similarity between what a TO host / guide does and what the typical ESF instructor does in a lesson for the ESF to ever accept the former.
As I understand it, the French consider full instructor qualification to be the appropriate qualification to perform this job!
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
abd wrote: |
Several things:
1) the SCGB guides do have some training / qualification (of sorts) and they still seem to be in the same position as the TO's guides.
|
Only because they appear to someone in France to appear to be a commercial organisation rather than a club. The French will have to be careful opening that can of worms though as it may hit a lot of French clubs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
abd wrote: |
Several things:
1) the SCGB guides do have some training / qualification (of sorts) and they still seem to be in the same position as the TO's guides.
2) somebody pointed out to me that there is too much similarity between what a TO host / guide does and what the typical ESF instructor does in a lesson for the ESF to ever accept the former.
As I understand it, the French consider full instructor qualification to be the appropriate qualification to perform this job! |
From what I understand of doing things on a voulenter basis (froom my local french alpine club) the SCGB may be able to return to guiding if they change their MO a bit.
BUT if a person working for a french company is to guide people around the piste, even if they normaly perform another function for that company ( just thinking how my local UCPA operates) they do need to be a qualified ski instructor - so the argument against the TO holds water.
If however France decided to have a ski guide (not a high mountain guide or ski instructor) qualification, as other countries do, e.g. Austria. Then TO's could look int getting this or it's equvalent.
One problem with France, is there is not a wide range of qualification for mountain activities compared to say the UK.
With the example of mountains in summer, to guide/lead hiking you need to be a High Mountain Guide or an Accompneutour (IML),
In the UK we have Hiking Leader, Mountain Leader (summer and winter seperatly), Intermational Mountain Leader, Mountain Instructor Certificate, Mountain Instructor Award and International Mountain Guide
In France only having the 2 levels, one of which is quite hard to get through the entry exams and has a long waiting list and the other is beyond all but the most determined athletes. If you have to have one of these to work in France as a Frenchman of course they will want the equivalent not less from anyone else - the same applies to skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
abd, instructor or guide as per the existing law.
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Idris wrote: |
From what I understand of doing things on a voulenter basis (froom my local french alpine club) the SCGB may be able to return to guiding if they change their MO a bit. |
but what would you suggest Tom? The SCGB setup doesn't look so different from the CAF even at a local level for some clubs. For example there are two CAFs in Grenoble both of which have full time staffers working for them as well as property on their books (refuge, club house). The CAF itself in Paris (FFCAM to be more precise) has a large full time staff, property and a travel business on the side, it sounds a lot like the SCGB and Fresh Tracks.
The only big factor seems to be the remuneration or emoluments offered to leaders in resort; but without that the leader program doesn't appear to work.
The court case will be very interesting. I suspect the emoluments will be swing it against the SCGB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
davidof, do you know if CAF leaders get any "perks" - eg contributions to expenses or a free places on the trips they organise?
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
CAF in property terms own most of the Alpine refuges in France.
CAF leaders are unpaid volunteers, even those who have gone through the amateur instructor qualifications, they are not allowed by law to be paid, they are well organised and very "professional" at what they do. Even though there are trips organised there is not the same contractual relationship between a paying participant and the obligation of CAF to provide a service as there is between Freshtracks clients and the SCGB and their guiding services.
It is only this part that makes SCGB guiding a paid for service, if they sat down with the French and modified their Freshtracks terms and conditions everything would be fine. They have not only aligned themselves with the tour operators but for many years have acted like one, because of this the French do not understand what or who they are and the ski club find themselves with a court case on their hands.
This is a great shame since SCGB may be old but it is a fine institution.
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Saint wrote: |
SCGB may be old but it is a fine institution. |
A memorable quote from Saint. Saint Bernard?
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Arno wrote: |
davidof, do you know if CAF leaders get any "perks" - eg contributions to expenses or a free places on the trips they organise? |
Some do, but it depends on the club, it is a federation of clubs so each have their own rules but obviously they don't get expenses on anything like the scale of the Ski Club. The club itself gets money from the government based on the number of PAX.
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Saint wrote: |
It is only this part that makes SCGB guiding a paid for service, if they sat down with the French and modified their Freshtracks terms and conditions everything would be fine. |
Freshtracks holidays are led by guides and is independent from the Ski Club's leading service. There is no problem with Freshtracks. The CAF run the same kind of setup as Freshtracks with Montagnes de la Terre.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
What I was talking about is a bit different. I did not explain myself well. In the holiday offer (it's description in the brochure). Is the statement that on a certain day or days of the week SCGB reps will be available to ski with the Freshtracks clients. If accepted and paid for it becomes part of a paid for contract. Of course any outside provision of services is different but this locks the club into a commercial contract even if it is within the membership. So I do not think it is the same. However I will look up the CAF provision on holidays and their wording. The thing is if there is no commercial contract it all fits within French law and becomes a purely club activity.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
dogwatch wrote: |
AFAIK Blue Badge is professional association, not a licence. |
A little off-topic, but are you aware of the daily rate for a blue-badge guide? Or the demand for them over the summer? It's a serious eye-opener!
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Blue badge day rate - same as for an Esf instructor or high mountain guide. So since French law requires a ski host to be either an instructor or guide where's the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Davidof: I am on my mobile but a quick look at CAF brochure did not seem to mention any skiing (within the contract) with CAF personnel - only the contracted professional guides etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saint wrote: |
What I was talking about is a bit different. I did not explain myself well. In the holiday offer (it's description in the brochure). Is the statement that on a certain day or days of the week SCGB reps will be available to ski with the Freshtracks clients. If accepted and paid for it becomes part of a paid for contract. Of course any outside provision of services is different but this locks the club into a commercial contract even if it is within the membership. So I do not think it is the same. However I will look up the CAF provision on holidays and their wording. The thing is if there is no commercial contract it all fits within French law and becomes a purely club activity. |
Well if the leader who was arrested was leading a Freshtracks group exclusively (without a professional) or if that is common practise in France as the FT brochure seems to imply then that seems borderline - are Freshtracks a commercial organisation or a club (like the Eagles?). FT certainly were a commercial outfit before CST brought them into the Ski Club. No doubt someone knowledgeable on such matters will confirm.
I thought it was the general ski leading that was in question, in which case it will be interesting to see what the French courts decide (if anyone is nice enough to get a copy of the judgement).
The Terre et Montagnes trips may have CAF leaders present but are guide led AFAIKS. That doesn't mean that local clubs don't organise multiday trips with a CAF leader and no guide present but not as part of the "commercial" side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I agree, from what I understand ordinary club activity only no Freshtracks. So there is a chance. But why align a club with tour operators and why not turn up and talk on a regular basis to inform each generation of the town hall, ESF etc who they are - it seems stupid to me. The locals simply think the ski club are taking the wee wee and laughing at the system because they are a tour operator in disguise.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
and I agree with your statement, having thought about it, that having taken money via the Ski Club/FT it is a contract. For the local ski clubs everyone will probably pay their own expenses. Things become a bit more blurred for the non-Alpine CAFs where you may pay a cheque to the club which covers transport (often in coaches with bunks) and accommodation and maybe some office fees. It seems close to the FT situation but then again the CAF are not skiing around on piste pissing off the ESF/DJS. The Ski Club case may have ramifications for others though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Through lack of forethought and communication the ski club have screwed up they were never perfect but were never all that bad.
I find it frustrating since if they phoned the guys who live out here and have the contacts, plus have some business and legal knowledge, they would be sitting pretty. I suppose their social life takes over over doing the best for their members and British skiing in general. Yes I am frustrated!
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Believe me - in it's role running refuges CAF really pisses the professionals off! All in all though it does not break the rules. It may not be good but it is not awful - perhaps misguided.... The ski club really needs to claw some ground back, and in a modern world - all across Europe. If they work with the pros their programme will work for several generations more. Frustrating!
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
rRegarding ski club guides/instructors teaching without qualification, one of my old employers 'teaches' and 'guides' in his local club as a British parent might coach football, so that is another exemption in the law. However, I think the French would refuse to classify the SCGB guiding groups as a club because adults outnumber children - I appreciate it probably doesn't say anywhere that a club has to be kids, but it's certainly the convention (and this being France, it probably does say it somewhere...) - and as the composition of the groups changes every week it doesn't fit their expectations either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Er no, the infraction they are charged with is: Providing on snow, on ski, activities, for payment. That's it. In France volunteers don't get paid they are a club. Anyone who gets paid has to be properly qualified under the law - period. The status of the club is another - and minor, issue.
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Yes I agree (as is evident from my hundreds of previous posts on this topic) but I'm trying to imagine how the SCGB are arguing / can argue / would argue against that charge by fitting themselves into the existing French framework, and how the French would respond. Can they say that a lift pass is no different to a French parent being given a baguette while accompanying a group of kids?
The Le Ski hosts are another matter, I fail to see what their defence could be.
I hope we get a court transcript one day.
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
The extremely small amount Ski Club reps are paid for expenses could easily be dispensed with. You then have the lift pass and accommodation which the resort provides. The resorts know what the reps do. Does the resort consider it is "paying" the rep? Is it going to be resorts versus the ESF?
Fresh Tracks holidays have not been questioned. You are right, though, that in some of those holidays there is a little skiing with the Holiday Leader (rep) (normally one warm-up day in my experience from the past - but none on some holidays). This could easily be dispensed with if it hasn't been already.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Wed 10-09-14 9:49; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I haven't had time to read this entire thread but here are a few thoughts. I was a ski guide in Valdisere for two seasons a couple of years back.
The whole thing is pretty sketchy in my opinion. Although it was a fantastic job I reckon safety is most definintely an issue. I worked for a VIP Ski and was given some training which was pretty helpful (first aid and a one day guiding course run by a British ski school) however it is in total around two days. Not nearly the same amount of training that a ski instructor would recieve to be legally allowed to instruct. Whilst I was pretty upset when it was made illegal in France why should instructors spend thousand of pounds on training and exams to then have some extremely under qualified British skiers taking clients on the mountain without sufficient training or qualifications.
I think the only way forward would be to somehow set up some sort of accredited training course which was recognised by the French Authorities. However as someone previously mentioned on this thread this would mean TOs investing money and time in their staff which we all know would simply never happen!
Reckon the games up on this one.
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
jiagedaping wrote: |
A little off-topic, but are you aware of the daily rate for a blue-badge guide? Or the demand for them over the summer? It's a serious eye-opener! |
AFAIK some venues control tour groups by allowing only blue-badge guides to operate within their premises. That isn't the same as protectionist legislation.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
sjb1989 wrote: |
Although it was a fantastic job I reckon safety is most definintely an issue. |
Joe Bloggs can and does rock up to the lift pass kiosk, buy a pass and he's on the mountain, no questions asked except "how would you like to pay, Monsieur". Now where's the safety issue?
I don't think anyone is arguing that instructors should not need qualifications.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
snowball wrote: |
You then have the lift pass and accommodation which the resort provides. |
But the cost of running the 'leader service' in winter 2012-3 was £241,320 [SCGB Annual Report and Accounts 2013]. A huge escalation in recent times - it used to run at around £60k in the good old days. My understanding is that the accommodation is rented, in some (many?) resorts by the Club itself, because the resort doesn't provide it.
Remember that worker accommodation in top resorts is very sought-after. In the current financial climate, do tourist offices really provide free accommodation to SCGB reps for weeks on end? That's the same accommodation that resort workers find so hard to come by.
The SCGB will have 'ambassadors' in 11 French resorts this winter, in a country where the full 'leader' service has been banned. Will these 11 resorts provide free accommodation for SCGB ambassadors, in gratitude for them providing a handful of members with advice about their ski activities for the day?
I'm simply putting this out there - does anyone know how many SCGB resorts continue to provide the hospitality?
[end of fishing]
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
volfy wrote: |
... It also helps if you don't spend years antagonising the locals. |
If "the locals" (something of a moveable feast in most ski resorts) want a closed shop, then they're going to antagonise the people they're trying to close out.
The law doesn't care either way, outside of France at least.
I think that the ESF as an institution continues to be a negative influence on the snow sports industry. They should deliver better quality services, then they'd not have to worry about competition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are many arguments that can be made re ski hosting on piste. However, I think the one that says you need to be qualified. paid or otherwise, does not stand up.
The piste is de facto being regarded as "safe" by the fact you are allowed to ski on it without qualified help. The ski hosts do not instruct they are merely there to help the punters' enjoy their skiing by showing them around the resort. Something the punter could do by reading the piste map. So any argument saying this service must be provided by qualified people is effectively saying everyone at all times should be guided on piste.
Indeed, as you are only paying for the ski lifts the actual use of the slopes is effectively free. A skinner does not have to pay anything if he does not want to. It effectively makes pistes public roads.
Off piste is slightly greyer but the same argument can be used.
ESF don't help themseleves by their poor standards. I saw numerous of their groups off piste - some very far off piste - last season. Not one of the people in these groups - including the instructor - had a rucksack. So none were suitably equipped. Then they arrest someone leading an SCGB group all of which were properly equipped and yet look the other way for the hundreds that each day go off piste in a reckless manner. The only conclusion is their concern is more to do with their pocket than their concern for safety.
Safety is paramount. Make decisions on that but be consistent. What is going on at the moment will do nobody any good in the long term including the ESF.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark1863, This is an interesting argument. Which if I may summarise goes like this:
The piste is open mountain where any one can go where they want.
Since it open anyone can guide, or instruct with or without qualification, experience or knowledge
Anything that happens to people following such "guides" is of no interest to anyone.
The same can be said for mountain climbing and rock climbing. I can set off on my own to climb rockface since I can read guidebooks and maps. Or indeed with a friend or climbing partners. I am allowed to do this without qualified help.
The same can be said for the sea where I can set off in my kayak across any bay that takes my fancy. I am allowed to do this without qualified help
But the Lyme bay tragedy court case disagrees, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/boss-is-jailed-over-canoe-deaths-1386979.html. And the law was subsequently modified in the UK with the AALA being introduced. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure_Activities_Licensing_Authority
With the exception of only formally applying to under 18s I see little difference between guiding punters around ski slopes and leading a walking party above 600m, 30 minutes from a road.
There is a big difference between doing something yourself under your own judgement and being led.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
johnE wrote: |
With the exception of only formally applying to under 18s I see little difference between guiding punters around ski slopes and leading a walking party above 600m, 30 minutes from a road.
There is a big difference between doing something yourself under your own judgement and being led. |
And in that exception lies, IMO, all the difference in the world. A legally competent adult should be able to make their own choices about who to follow around a mountain/up a rock/out to sea. An under 18 is not legally competent to make that decision
|
|
|
|
|
|
johnE,
I'm not sure I follow your reasoning: isn't the Lyme case completely different? The company received explicit payment didn't it?
It's possible that the group I have skied with for the last couple of years may choose to go to l'Aple d'Huez in the coming season. Having been there half a dozen times, it's a resort I know very well.
If I 'guide' everyone by giving a quick tour on the first day, and the group leader buys me a pint afterwards, does that put me in the firing line?
|
|
|
|
|
|