 Poster: A snowHead
|
| feef wrote: |
| skison wrote: |
I don't know better than French judges. I'm not arguing French law. His current challenge is why he is illegal when he should have had a Carte Pro like the others. And why does he have a criminal record? It's a round in circles argument because no one has come out and detailed the reasons.
|
But his expulsion was based on the fact that he illegally employed L2 and L3 instructors in France. With or without a Carte Pro, that would still have been illegal.
There's two separate issues here.
1: SB's own qualification with regards to ISTD status, grandfather rights the ET and associated stuff.
2: Membership of BASI being terminated for employing L2 and L3 instructors in France which is illegal and so "bringing the organisation into disrepute", which would have been the case even if point 1 was done and dusted to everyone's agreement.
He has a criminal record for point 2 irrespective of any record due to point 1. |
Correct and as you know ongoing.
That's the situation but as you know it's now rattling between layers and being challenged. Therefore that may be proven wrong. That's part of the appeal process - what level is the correct level, declaring yoursel as required etc. At the moment it's what it is. If it somehow does go his way then I don't know what can be done retrospectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@TTT, The French judges are following guidelines and information provided to them by the French Ministry for sport they can only act on that information or be accused of substituting their opinion for that of the other party ie the ministry.
The French have said only those schools with a min of ten instructors with the French Diploma can form a training school so the judge has to make a decision on that and that alone even if the judge believes it may be against EU law. The judge will allow that to be decided by either a higher court or by the EU themselves.
The EU need to make a very clear directive that either 10 equivalents can open a training school or they can not and only those with a French diploma can.
The French judge is not corrupt or in league with the ESF or ministry they are acting within guidelines set down that mean they can not easily interpret points as complicated as this and it is much easier and safer to allow a higher court or the EU to make that decision as that will then be used as case law for any future cases of a similar nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@speed098, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your point but I do think people are continually confusing 2 separate points here which is where I feel misunderstood no doubt because no matter how many times I say it I obviously have not expressed it clearly enough. It is the judges job to decide whether SB has complied with the law or not and they keep finding SB guilty. Whether the law is right or wrong which you are arguing is a separate point.
In reality though the market for advanced lessons is very small as the majority get to a level where they can get around and then don't do a lot if any lessons. My perception is that all the major ski countries not just France have come up with a market compromise whereby the locals want to keep the mass market while they are fine with people working for them or taking the niche market. As I've always freely admitted that works for me but I do understand why some people like the SB product. I would like to see SB being able to work in France and the training centre rules opened up as a compromise. I really don't think though that most lower level instructors are bothered about the right to work in France on nursery slopes for below minimal wages as they just do a GAP course and never instruct or they are happy to work elsewhere casually or develop in other countries and want the opportunity that France gives them to make a career out of instructing. Therefore I do think in reality this is about SB'S business model rather than the rights of instructors. We all know the French rules when we sign up. Classic route is start off in Austria or interski as level 2. develop as level 3 or 4 in CH and make a living in Fr as level 4. Of course that is not consistent from a dogmatic point of view but my view is that pragmatically it works well on an overall pan-European basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@speed098, I think you are being harsh on the French judge's . SB'S side themselves said that the judge was very thorough and clearly understood the issues. In my experience judges' are not gullible and work on the basis of law and evidence. SB has had an opportunity to present his evidence on many occasions and has not been able to convince a judge.
@skison, you have got it and the third issue is employing staff illegally. Whether the laws are right or wrong is a separate issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
[quote="TTT"
@skison, you have got it and the third issue is employing staff illegally. Whether the laws are right or wrong is a separate issue.[/quote]
I always did have it. My argument is against the flaws in the system that have perpetuated the situation and BASI have been party to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Welcome to the world of business and politics
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@TTT, just to inform you that the ski school in Megeve has benefited from Simon's demise because they have received work from SB skiing. I would suggest that your earlier post was incorrect and they are in the same market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dunk, SB is a TO with instruction and BASS is a ski school. Sure there is some overlap but it is a different product and I don't for a moment believe this was the reason based on my discussions and it is "naughty" of the SB team to suggest so. Those with an interest in Megeve declared an interest and were not party to the vote. It does not change that reasons for the decision. I think you do understand why BASI did this and you know competition in Megeve was not the reason. If SB had a problem with BASS then they would not be passing work to them so it does contradict that this is the real reason especially when it has only now been suggested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dunk, I think you have grasped the concept of advocacy  . Of course I would have done the same. I think you will see SBS will also have MoU and Carte Pro this season. Nothing like a night in the cells for clarity. I still recommend option B whatever the rights or wrongs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| TTT wrote: |
@speed098, I think you are being harsh on the French judge's . SB'S side themselves said that the judge was very thorough and clearly understood the issues. In my experience judges' are not gullible and work on the basis of law and evidence. SB has had an opportunity to present his evidence on many occasions and has not been able to convince a judge.
@skison, you have got it and the third issue is employing staff illegally. Whether the laws are right or wrong is a separate issue. |
I may not have come across clearly then either I am not saying the judge was gullible and did not know his job and do the best to interpret this mess. But with the best intention he is not an EU lawyer or lawmaker. He has to interpret the French law and may have had to interpret based on French law more so than EU law and if that French law says ten with a diploma then ten with a diploma is what he must rule.
It will be for a higher court or the ECJ to decide if only ten or more with diploma or if ten or more with equivalent to the diploma is the correct interpretation. If the EU directive is not clear enough or there is no case law to follow the judge may deem it is beyond his remit to potentially set a precedent that then becomes part of the EU directive/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.
|
|
I think even SB's convicted mate said he did not have a problem with how EU rules had been implemented into French law. I'm really not aware of anything that covers training centres in EU rules. It seems silent on the matter as only covers equivalent qualifications for workers and does not mention training
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
| Welcome to the world of business and politics |
BASI seem to lack competence in either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Harsh as many have experience of running their own businesses and have extensive experience of the politics. BASI are just one player in the game. There is nothing to stop those members with experience of business and politics to run for office or for members to make suggestions. I deal with many businesses and they really don't do badly. As ever it is easier in life to sit and criticise then it is to actually do something and keep everyone happy in practice. Just because they are not on the bandwagon of one member does not mean the rest of us are unhappy as they have many different interests to represent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| TTT wrote: |
| I think even SB's convicted mate said he did not have a problem with how EU rules had been implemented into French law. I'm really not aware of anything that covers training centres in EU rules. It seems silent on the matter as only covers equivalent qualifications for workers and does not mention training |
This I think is the problem there is a serious lack of clarity in the EU directive. We can speculate and blame or better still just accept there is and look at ways to resolve the problem.
All parties are interpreting equivalency slightly differently the French say L4 for teaching but do not then extend that to equivalency in all things such as the ability and right to operate a training school.
BASI are not pushing for clarity for it's members a simple question is all it takes equal in all respects or only limited? If limited in what way and for what reason.
SB has employed L2 and L3 contrary to the French law as interpreted so far, it has yet to be decided at a higher level if that law is in breach of EU. If it is, then it is hard to continue a case that SB employed instructors that he could only have done so as a training school with or without ten L4 ISTD, ( though he may be found guilty of a lesser charge still, which I would say should be set aside in relation to a conviction so as he is not thrown out of BASI ).
Hopefully this case will be dealt with sooner rather than later I would hope the new ruling will be any equivalent instructors meeting the min number of ten can form a training school be they ESF, BASI or any other associations instructors from within the EU.
I do not think any of us here are at total odds with each other we all have some valid points but are possibly coming across more one sided than is intended and if that is happening here how bad/hard is it for those actually involved to step back and sort this mess out with the minimum of legal wrangling and public airing which is not to the benefit of any involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@speed098, with the odd exception, agreed. People are mostly discussing or arguing with half truths, conjectures or whispers. If we put aside the methods and processes that may or may not have been followed correctly by BASI and SB, the bottom line is it will be decided ultimately by an EU court, which will either way most likely be challenged but until that runs through due process it's all in fighting to a degree.
SB and SBS could have done things better and should have.
BASI could have and should have done things better.
Both sides should have kept the discussions internal until there was no further internal discussions possible.
As has been said the only real winners are the law firms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| speed098 wrote: |
@marksavoie,
So please provide here a list of some of the BASI training schools that employ L2 and L3 instructors in the same way the ESF schools that hold the Centre de Formation have stagiaire employed.
Maybe I have not looked hard enough but I can not find a single one which given your earlier post re holding the French Diploma seems to explain why I can not find any. |
To enable an answer please can you clarify the following:
Above you mention "BASI training schools" - Do you mean a training school running BASI courses or do you actually mean a British ski school that wishes to put trainee ski instructors through the French ski instructor system?
From my understanding (I'm not a ski instructor but as a "mountain professional" in France).
BASI L2 & L3 instructors can only gain French "stagiaire" (trainee status) if they have passed there "Test Technique".
The reason for a BASI L2 or L3 to pass the TT is so that they can then go into the French ski instructor training programme.
There is no obligation for them to do this. They can go all the way through the BASI system to L4 ISTD and pass the Eurotest (as agreed by the EU) and then be granted "equivalance" with the French Moniteur de Ski. With a formal "equivalence" (written certificate) in hand they can then request a "Carte Professionnelle" to work legally as a ski instructor in France.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@speed098, I know training centre rules are very much on the BASI agenda. BASI have been told by EU that finalising the MoU is the top matter on the agenda and then other matters will follow. I really don't think it is covered by the EU at all. It is logical that only the French can teach the French system but then ideally BASI should be able to teach the BASI system in France with work in peak periods, Let's not forget a level 2 would effectively have to pay to work in CH as part of a level 3 training course which is what a friend of mine is doing . Getting a better deal for level 3s in France is the next step after the MoU is sorted out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| marksavoie wrote: |
| speed098 wrote: |
@marksavoie,
So please provide here a list of some of the BASI training schools that employ L2 and L3 instructors in the same way the ESF schools that hold the Centre de Formation have stagiaire employed.
Maybe I have not looked hard enough but I can not find a single one which given your earlier post re holding the French Diploma seems to explain why I can not find any. |
To enable an answer please can you clarify the following:
Above you mention "BASI training schools" - Do you mean a training school running BASI courses or do you actually mean a British ski school that wishes to put trainee ski instructors through the French ski instructor system?
From my understanding (I'm not a ski instructor but as a "mountain professional" in France).
BASI L2 & L3 instructors can only gain French "stagiaire" (trainee status) if they have passed there "Test Technique".
The reason for a BASI L2 or L3 to pass the TT is so that they can then go into the French ski instructor training programme.
There is no obligation for them to do this. They can go all the way through the BASI system to L4 ISTD and pass the Eurotest (as agreed by the EU) and then be granted "equivalance" with the French Moniteur de Ski. With a formal "equivalence" (written certificate) in hand they can then request a "Carte Professionnelle" to work legally as a ski instructor in France. |
For a BASI training school to be able to employ and train up BASI L2 and above ( I would preclude L1's from anything other than temporary shadowing ) within the BASI system just as the ESF can employ and then train up stagiaire's for the French ESF system.
At no point should a BASI school train up ESF or an ESF train up BASI.
The TT ( Test technique ) I would argue would not be required as it is a BASI school but that is for others to decide later so lets leave that please till a later date.
I would like to see a test similar to the ET still for L3 and above but pass % lowered and teaching ability to be taken into account for teaching upto high intermediate or lower advanced levels ( probably around level 8 on the inside out video's). But with the proviso that to teach the very highest then the ET would get tougher after all the people you wish to instruct ski to a high std.
This ET could actually be either a slalom or a GS and the candidate can decide which to go for prior to each official attempt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@TTT What's your BASI update? Any appeal coming on SB's licence reinstatement? I wonder if the penny has dropped with yet on where this is leading. I can only image the hotline between BASI and their French 'colleagues' has been glowing this week?
So let's hear the news.
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Fri 28-11-14 22:17; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@skison, are you TTT and Mr goldmsmith actually all the same person and trying to keep the conversation with yourself going?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No.
TTT seems to know a lot of inside info. Today's Planetski update didn't shed any light on progress so who better to ask. If BASI were so sure as TTT insisted, I would have thought a quick rebuff of last weeks action would have been in order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's the Planetski link
| Quote: |
BASI is critical of the way Mr Butler went to the Court of Session in Edinburg without its prior knowledge and has urged him to follow the internal appeals process.
Mr Butler has told PlanetSKI that he has no confidence in the internal appeals process and fears the Association is "out to get him".
In the meantime a resolution to the issue seems a long way off with the row set to continue and escalate unless positions change. |
Hardly surprising that SB did not forewarn BASI about his appeal ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Let me get this right. They kick one of their own in the teeth, then when he fights back, they become "critical" because he doesn't give them advance warning?
| Quote: |
| We say don't show your guns, if you don't intend to fight. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe a certain Burke at BASI might start to understand what it is like to find a hearing has gone ahead without any knowledge of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
When earlier I said:
| Quote: |
| It is quite obvious that BASI, operating as a private organisation, has become so p*ssed of with SB that it has made an emotional decision to be rid of him but in doing so has left itself open to litigation under civil law. |
To which TTT replied:
| Quote: |
@irie, there are indeed strong feeling but - have reason to believe this was not done without careful consideration and legal advice and that the risk is low for reasons I have given as no loss caused by basi.
What will convince me otherwise is a successful appeal by SB which may happen or someone gives me a proper legal reason why the french judge and basi's lawyers are wrong which no one has been able to do. As that is at least 2 years off I feel safe for now! |
Evidently my judgement was right.
Sooner or later SB and BASI are going to have to talk, and BASI are likely to have their noses rubbed in it. In a sense it doesn't make any difference whether they're technically right or wrong, it is self evident that they have mis-managed the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
I would be surprised if BASI's lawyers hadn't advised them to get TTT to put a sock in it. As it were.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Either that or they actually employed a media relations person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
...or he was their media relations person 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
Not a mention though of the most pressing matter for BASI (in my humble opinion)
|
elephant in the room .... if they had their act together they'd be pumping out a "line to take", surely?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| irie wrote: |
Sooner or later SB and BASI are going to have to talk, and BASI are likely to have their noses rubbed in it. In a sense it doesn't make any difference whether they're technically right or wrong, it is self evident that they have mis-managed the situation. |
The talking may well take place in a court. BASI have had more than enough time to deal with this. They don't need to bow to the French any more.
I can't imagine BASI not getting their noses rubbed in it now. It must have cost SB a lot of cash to get this far. At the very least they will be made to look foolish and at a cost. SB was locked up and fined because of no MOU. If his reinstatement is upheld (on BASI appeal) or not challenged then he should be going after his MOU at the same time as getting his licence situation sorted.
As I said, TTT thinks it's an open and shut case yet BASI have not been able to move on it. If it was that clear it would have been dealt with on Monday morning?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| laundryman wrote: |
| I would be surprised if BASI's lawyers hadn't advised them to get TTT to put a sock in it. As it were. |
TTT didn't actually deny he was Stephen Burke after all. Maybe he had a word with himself in the mirror .
I don't actually think he is Burke - he is very close but not him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
| ...or he was their media relations person |
Or
| Quote: |
| ...or she was their media relations person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I am amazed that the SB cultists are interested to hear the views of someone that they disagree with as a matter of dogma. For a group that purports to support freedom they are not free to taking on ideas of anyone who has a view other than their own.
Of course basi are not saying anything. It is standard legal advice not to say anything as it may prejudice your case. SB and his supporters do not seem to have grasped this basic standard legal practice which demonstrates how little they understand the law.
There really is nothing new here. We have learnt that 6-1 of the board freely elected by the membership voted against SB. SB and his supporters may wish to ponder why the vast majority of those people in the know such as judges and basi board decide against him.
No one has reported on the relevant general law regarding his licence. A conflict of interest relating to people not party to the decision has been scurrilously suggested and if this is the SB case as planetski insinuates then his case does not have genuine substance.
I have never said that I am a basi insider, that this is cut and dried or that I agree with the legal director. It seems some people are incapable of reading what I have written and most certainly not capable of understanding between the lines. The season has not even started for SB yet so he has absolutely no basis for a claim for damages. The courts will decide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
Of course basi are not saying anything. It is standard legal advice not to say anything as it may prejudice your case. SB and his supporters do not seem to have grasped this basic standard legal practice which demonstrates how little they understand the law.
|
LOL - you were adamant they were within their rights.
What could be taking so long I wonder?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
| ... SB cultists ... |
Cultists?
| thefreedictionary wrote: |
| cultist - a member of an unorthodox cult who generally lives outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| irie wrote: |
| TTT wrote: |
| ... SB cultists ... |
Cultists?
|
Or...Jedi Knights? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TTT wrote: |
I have never said that I am a basi insider, that this is cut and dried or that I agree with the legal director. It seems some people are incapable of reading what I have written and most certainly not capable of understanding between the lines. The season has not even started for SB yet so he has absolutely no basis for a claim for damages. The courts will decide. |
You portray yourself as someone very knowledgeable on the facts of this matter and what BASI are doing, to the point where it comes across as you being fed information to post on here, despite me showing you as being selective in the statements you make. Half truths at best. The half that shows you utterly biased on this matter.
SB was arrested last season as he did not have an MOU and fined - BASI's issue to explain. Without it this year it would have cost him money. How can he possibly not have claims for damage?
1) Licence taken away
2) MOU refused
After all this time it's hardly a surprise he is now taking legal action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
