 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
I get the impression that the SCGB has already been operating very successfully roughly in line with the new "rep" model in Zell am See.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
I get the impression that the SCGB has already been operating very successfully roughly in line with the new "rep" model in Zell am See.
|
No Zell am See has not been running in line with the new model. In fact they often had 3 leaders out at a time leading groups last season along with offering everything the new service offers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Not done a S/H bash but the "responsibility on the most experienced" must surely apply there too ?
I did do a specimen disclaimer form once, which all members in a group would sign, declaring themselves to be EMUS ....Equally Experienced Mutual Unattached....... and allocating all responsibilities equally. could publish it if of interest. Might go a bit of the way to allow people to ski together without legal fear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
I did do a specimen disclaimer form once, which all members in a group would sign, declaring themselves to be EMUS ....Equally Experienced Mutual Unattached....... and allocating all responsibilities equally. could publish it if of interest. Might go a bit of the way to allow people to ski together without legal fear.
|
You need to find new ski buddies 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Farley Goode wrote: |
| Not done a S/H bash but the "responsibility on the most experienced" must surely apply there too ? |
Well possibly but then all social groupings including e.g families skiing could ultimately end up with all being prosecuted if e.g. a weaker party member breaks a leg. Most of us expect that the law, evn in France has no real interest in making it happen and that the intent of the law is to put a curb on the most reckless behaviours & protect the job market for ski instructors/guides. it's easy to see where the "old" ski club model - basically ski with me for a one off fee rather than those foreign jonnies and we'll all have a jolly good time- puts them over the line. Less clear where a group of mates collectively decide they are happy following the person with most knoweldge of a particualr area/ best pow sniffing nose etc.
I really don't know how the ski club new model would work. Obviously I don't fit their target customer but I wouldn't want to turn up somewhere to be put together with assorted strangers of unknown ability and then feel under some social obligation to stick together even if it turned out skiing abilities and aspirations were vastly different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Farley Goode wrote: |
| Not done a S/H bash but the "responsibility on the most experienced" must surely apply there too ? |
No!
When a bunch of people on a snowHeads bash go skiing together, it's as a group of friends. If anyone is uncomfortable about the route taken they can say so without fear of any mocking and others will adjust accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Farley Goode wrote: |
| Not done a S/H bash but the "responsibility on the most experienced" must surely apply there too ? |
I really don't know how the ski club new model would work. |
I've looked at the SCGB announcements and am similarly confused. If they add the Rep offering to Instructor Lead Guiding (which is almost France only), then that would make sense, If they replaced the existing 'leading' service with 'repping' then they are going to disappoint many.
If they establish a professional service coupled with a local 'Rep' service then they will attract many new members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alastair wrote: |
If they establish a professional service coupled with a local 'Rep' service then they will attract many new members. |
How so? Pay a large membership fee for the pleasure of belonging to a club that will sell local "guiding services" to me, which may or may not be available on the day I want?
I can see how it works if SCGB membership reverted to a "freemium" model where central costs are covered by the rake on the services members actually purchase but at the moment the proposition seems to be "pay us a non trivial lump sum for the opportunity to be sold more stuff and oh there will be a pub you can go to if you want to meet other people in the same boat".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Surely it needs to be a culpably bad decision before the issue of who was leader etc becomes an issue? So if you spud yourself on a blue run no one is going to question why you were there in the first place unless you are a first day beginner. If you’re on a steep run miles from a piste just after a new snowfall, there will be more questions to answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, I think the idea is that there are no charges for the repping service. I'm not suggesting it will suit everyone (probably very few on here) but some will be pleased by a local rep in resort. It's not unreasonable that there would be a charge for local guiding via a professional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| "pay us a non trivial lump sum for the opportunity to be sold more stuff and oh there will be a pub you can go to if you want to meet other people in the same boat". |
I'm not sure the Tea Club will hire you for their marketing director even if the ASA would be happy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| davidof wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| "pay us a non trivial lump sum for the opportunity to be sold more stuff and oh there will be a pub you can go to if you want to meet other people in the same boat". |
I'm not sure the Tea Club will hire you for their marketing director even if the ASA would be happy. |
Chunky chips or no chunky chips; that is the question!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
So will it now be much easier to become a SCGB 'rep: ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| essex wrote: |
| So will it now be much easier to become a SCGB 'rep: ? |
It would seem logical to assume so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| essex wrote: |
| So will it now be much easier to become a SCGB 'rep: ? |
The logical assumption would be that the SCGB rather than employing grizzled mountain men as reps, given their customer demographic would be better employing 20 something dollies to do the facilitation, create a "social atmosphere" etc etc. Can't see many wanting to do it for free though when chalet operators essentially offer the same package in less isolated circumstances
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
As the remaining responsibilities of SCGB reps are now of a social nature I presume the assessment tests for the role will include the ability to organise a resort pub crawl (shouldn't be too hard)....... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Farley Goode wrote: |
| I did do a specimen disclaimer form once, which all members in a group would sign, declaring themselves to be EMUS ....Equally Experienced Mutual Unattached....... and allocating all responsibilities equally. could publish it if of interest. Might go a bit of the way to allow people to ski together without legal fear. |
If you don't mind me saying, I think that's mad. Bits of paper in amateur legalese that are designed to circumnavigate THE LAW go down particularly poorly in court. Likewise disclaimers where the activity is potentially a bit dodgy and the organiser thinks it's the way out of any liability. It isn't. And nothing stops someone from suing someone else if they think they can.
Personally I have never felt in 'legal fear' when skiing in a group!
But The Ski Club has a different issue in that they are a business and there is an expenses-paid rep standing there, presumably in uniform, representing the business and organising Members into groups. Going 'social skiing' with members but not 'leading' probably adds up to much the same thing.
Overall though this change isn't very well communicated demonstrated by the fact lots of people seem confused by it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Alastair wrote: |
| Farley Goode wrote: |
| Not done a S/H bash but the "responsibility on the most experienced" must surely apply there too ? |
No!
When a bunch of people on a snowHeads bash go skiing together, it's as a group of friends. If anyone is uncomfortable about the route taken they can say so without fear of any mocking and others will adjust accordingly. |
There are two sides to this, civil and criminal. You may well be 100% sure one of the others in the group won't blame you for the fall they just had when you past them but if there's a serious injury or death then the authorities look from criminality. When all your mates are being interviewed separately, how sure are you that you won't get thrown under the proverbial bus? That route you suggested and they all agreed on, are you sure they'll all remember it like that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@davidof, The DSV's primary role is organising various competitions and ski teams (mostly nordic rather than alpine), along with that they also organise a lot of ski teaching mainly aimed at children but also instructor training. They would also have an input into setting various standards for safety, equipment etc. I dont believe any of this is relevant to the SCGB.
There is a big cultural thing in Germany around belonging to clubs, there is a large network of local ski clubs which encompass both social and competitive skiing and this would feed into the DSV. All the villages around here have clubs which organise weekend (or even weekday) trips to the mountains. Anyone who has been skiing in Austria will be well used to seeing the large number of German coaches in the lift station car parks.
Maybe it is my ignorance but I have always assumed the SCGB was a bunch of hoorays who were trying to get others to pay for their skiing  . Maybe now that has been stopped they will at least get their beer (or champagne) paid for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| Alastair wrote: |
| Farley Goode wrote: |
| Not done a S/H bash but the "responsibility on the most experienced" must surely apply there too ? |
No!
When a bunch of people on a snowHeads bash go skiing together, it's as a group of friends. If anyone is uncomfortable about the route taken they can say so without fear of any mocking and others will adjust accordingly. |
There are two sides to this, civil and criminal. You may well be 100% sure one of the others in the group won't blame you for the fall they just had when you past them but if there's a serious injury or death then the authorities look from criminality. When all your mates are being interviewed separately, how sure are you that you won't get thrown under the proverbial bus? That route you suggested and they all agreed on, are you sure they'll all remember it like that? |
Worse, the grieving spouse of the victim had no knowledge of how the group functions. And the juries had no understanding of the difference.
Not saying it applies to SH specifically. But this sort of issue could affect ANY group of "friends".
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Wed 3-07-19 15:23; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| munich_irish wrote: |
| @davidof, The DSV's primary role is organising various competitions and ski teams (mostly nordic rather than alpine), along with that they also organise a lot of ski teaching mainly aimed at children but also instructor training. They would also have an input into setting various standards for safety, equipment etc. I dont believe any of this is relevant to the SCGB. |
The SCGB used to have the same roles as the DSV, it gave up being the UK governing body for skiing in 1964.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gerry wrote: |
There are two sides to this, civil and criminal. You may well be 100% sure one of the others in the group won't blame you for the fall they just had when you past them but if there's a serious injury or death then the authorities look from criminality. When all your mates are being interviewed separately, how sure are you that you won't get thrown under the proverbial bus? That route you suggested and they all agreed on, are you sure they'll all remember it like that? |
So you've probably done more group skiing than anyone on here - how many incidents have your had that came anywhere near litigation? And now that you'll no longer be insured for any sort of on slope leadership will you stop group skiing entirely?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@Alastair Pink, That's good news about St Anton! I was one of the last to "rep" there, before we were banned. Might be tempted to go back, now!
I think that the instructor-led days are actually pretty good value, but it will be interesting to see how many members take them up... Many members will prob decline, due to cost, while other might just do a day or 2 a week. Can't imagine the ski school or the SCGB subsidising them / running them at a loss indefinitely, if numbers are low...
Reckon that some members will prob also let their memberships lapse, if there is no longer a free leading / guiding service on offer... For many that I used to lead, that was the No.1 reason that they joined...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
There are two sides to this, civil and criminal. You may well be 100% sure one of the others in the group won't blame you for the fall they just had when you past them but if there's a serious injury or death then the authorities look from criminality. When all your mates are being interviewed separately, how sure are you that you won't get thrown under the proverbial bus? That route you suggested and they all agreed on, are you sure they'll all remember it like that? |
So you've probably done more group skiing than anyone on here - how many incidents have your had that came anywhere near litigation? And now that you'll no longer be insured for any sort of on slope leadership will you stop group skiing entirely? |
I stopped leading on-snow for the club at the end of 2014 when the arrest and court case began. I only do backmasking for guides and instructors now. I never had any worrying moments leading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| abc wrote: |
Worse, the grieving spouse of the victim had no knowledge of how the group functions. And the juries had no understanding of the difference.
. |
If you're talking about a civil law case where the grieving spouse decides to sue someone in the group then AFAIK only the US has juries in civil law cases. Even in criminal cases many (most?) European countries try such cases in front of judges, not juries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
BMC advice:
"Amateur climbers should be aware of and accept the risks of participation ( see BMC participation statement ) and should also be aware that, where they are the nominal or actual leader of others, they may be held responsible in the event of an accident.:"
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/how-liable-are-you
my Bold
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone actually been prosecuted in this “group leader of friends” situation? Guides or instructors maybe but can’t say I’ve ever heard of anyone being sued by their mates for taking them off piste and having an accident?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| munich_irish wrote: |
Maybe it is my ignorance but I have always assumed the SCGB was a bunch of hoorays who were trying to get others to pay for their skiing . Maybe now that has been stopped they will at least get their beer (or champagne) paid for. |
I'm not sure it has been stopped, just they won't have to lead the riff-raff around the slopes any more. Trebles all round.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| BobinCH wrote: |
| Has anyone actually been prosecuted in this “group leader of friends” situation? Guides or instructors maybe but can’t say I’ve ever heard of anyone being sued by their mates for taking them off piste and having an accident? |
In France, yes, prosecuted by the State but it is extremely rare for amateur groups and the police are not generally too bothered about groups of friends. They are interested in clubs or people working for businesses where there may be subsequent insurance claims. Most recently some Serbian instructors who came over to France with guests and were instructing them on the slopes.
The cases I can think where there was a prosecution of non professionals were exceptional and I can give more details if anyone wants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| essex wrote: |
| So will it now be much easier to become a SCGB 'rep: ? |
The logical assumption would be that the SCGB rather than employing grizzled mountain men as reps, given their customer demographic would be better employing 20 something dollies to do the facilitation, create a "social atmosphere" etc etc. Can't see many wanting to do it for free though when chalet operators essentially offer the same package in less isolated circumstances |
That's more like it but it will end up like a Crystal Ski Holiday. Bit of Apresse mate? Pub crawl? Free slammer in each bar you visit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| BobinCH wrote: |
Has anyone actually been prosecuted in this “group leader of friends” situation?
Guides or instructors maybe but can’t say I’ve ever heard of anyone being sued by their mates for taking them off piste and having an accident? |
I'm somewhat familiar with a case in a Vancouver court where two people were heliskiing as "buddies", which has some parallels.
The party was guided (lead and tail guides), on an easy run with an alpine top, a forest in the middle, and a clear-cut at the bottom.
An American bloke was paired with a Brit for the trees. At the bottom of the clear-cut the Brit turned up but his partner didn't.
... the guide asked him where he was... they had to go and look, and found him dead in a well up in the clear cut.
It turned out the deceased was married to an America lawyer, who took action not against the heli company or the guide, but against his buddy.
It went to court... and the judge threw it out.
=> in Canada at least you can ride with your friends and not risk litigation should they decide to fall into a hole when you're not looking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| philwig wrote: |
| BobinCH wrote: |
Has anyone actually been prosecuted in this “group leader of friends” situation?
Guides or instructors maybe but can’t say I’ve ever heard of anyone being sued by their mates for taking them off piste and having an accident? |
I'm somewhat familiar with a case in a Vancouver court where two people were heliskiing as "buddies", which has some parallels.
The party was guided (lead and tail guides), on an easy run with an alpine top, a forest in the middle, and a clear-cut at the bottom.
An American bloke was paired with a Brit for the trees. At the bottom of the clear-cut the Brit turned up but his partner didn't.
... the guide asked him where he was... they had to go and look, and found him dead in a well up in the clear cut.
It turned out the deceased was married to an America lawyer, who took action not against the heli company or the guide, but against his buddy.
It went to court... and the judge threw it out.
=> in Canada at least you can ride with your friends and not risk litigation should they decide to fall into a hole when you're not looking. |
There was a certain rather gobby and self-assured snowhead who sued a mate and fellow snowhead over some skiing issue, I forget what exactly. Friends can turn on each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
For what it's worth, I actually like the concept of having a GB ski club. Losing the leadership is a huge loss for them.
In general I feel they lack the vibe I'm looking for, too much of a tour operator for relatively wealthy middle aged on piste fair weather skiers. I accept that's the majority of the market, but not me. I used their leading service once and it was great, I slept on a mates floor and hung out with ski club gb while he worked. IMO they would do really well if they acted like a club with useful news, live in-resort reports (e.g. conditions in specific faces, parties, weekly ski club deals etc.). They desperately need more depth in their trip offering, particularly on price......finally the lack of an active online forum community turns me off which coincidentally I found here, although this forum really needs a mobile version and a facelift!
With ~25k members ski club gb is a victim of it's own success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
With ~25k members ski club gb is a victim of it's own success.
|
Goldsmith in 3...2...1... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I would agree this is a backward step but perhaps give the Club the benefit of the doubt and assume they looked at all the angles.
They have us Members interests at heart. I cannot but help make comparisons with this 'club' however.
SCGB is a properly constituted business - SHs looks like a sole trader
SCGB produces accounts available publicly - SHs does not
SCGB pays corporation tax, PAYE, VAT - SHs allegedly does not and never has but should do because we all bloody have to
SCGB holidays are bonded and money is protected - SHs breaks the law here unless the details are kept secret
SCGB has liability insurance - SHs does not appear to bother but you will only find out too late
SCGB staff are criminal records checked - oh allegedly that is a bit of a problem that one for SHs
But caveat emptor. I will stay supporting SCGB thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Huhtamaki, normally on someone's first post I would say welcome to snowHeads. In this instance I suggest that you go and grind your axe, wash your sock, or whatever, somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When SCGB started to change their insurance I downgraded my platinum membership to standard membership and started getting insurance from MPI. Now that the Leaders have gone the ski club no longer offers anything of interest for me. The discounts are fairly useless compared to what you can find by shopping around and I prefer Snoworks to Freshtracks. But I guess there's always that magazine!
I've had some fun times skiing with leaders and I've met some interesting people.
Thank you to the ski club.
Time to move on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
That's a bit of an odd post from a newcomer to Snowheads. Allegations of illegality and aspersions of dark secrets in the snowheads membership. I have to admit it comes across to me as someone with not just a bit of a grudge but also a bit of a chip on his shoulder.
Still I guess we welcome all sorts here. Welcome to snowheads Hutamaki.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@olderscot, very generous of you to extend a welcome. Sounds like a thoroughly nasty piece of work to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
