Are teacher's trips to inspect ski resorts 'inducements'?

A snowHead

Any system that requires a teacher to do a pre visit is ridiculous and another example of h&s gone mad. Companies offering such trips should do the leg work and provide all the paperwork.

A snowHead

leedsunited, I had several family members at the Bradford City stadium that day so trust me the actions of the leeds fans and the infamous chip van incident were not well recieved

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Don't you find it depressing when forums descend into being a bit like an episode of Eastenders? Reading some of what has gone before is as much fun as biting into that bit of foil you left on your Kit Kat.

School trip organisers now work very much in isolation. There is often no LEA advice, no national guidelines and so the only support is often from the TO. Most are very good, but as the Ski Europe saga has shown there will occasionally be dodgy ones that will make the headlines.

The problem for a new TO is how do you take business away from the existing TO? A 'pre-visit' at little or no cost to a party leader is an obvious way of showing that you have got something in place and it's not just a lot of words in a brochure or on a web-site. Somebody made the point earlier that it seems that with these trips you are damned if you do (bribery) and damned if you don't (negligent). The other key way a TO attracts business, of course, is to offer lower prices. If you can get a trip for your pupils that is £50-100 cheaper than the established firms then you should do, shouldn't you? as you are shopping for the best deal on the behalf of all the parents involved. But that can be why they then run into financial problems.

Most visits are only 'free' if a group booking is made as a result. Such a visit is not essential if you have a good rep (usually, but not always) and your group are in lessons for 5-6 hours/day. Most LEAs will allow teachers to ski with their group (that is lead not instruct) outside of lesson times if they have the ASCL (Alpine Ski Course Leaders) qualification. In this situation the cost of ski school can be reduced by the group having just 2-4 hours tuition per day. This is when the pre-visit becomes important - it gives the staff involved a chance to find their way around the resort and slopes and, yes, if they are honest, enjoy a short ski break without 30-40 kids to worry about.

My biggest gripe is Snowsport England who run the ASCL courses. We have to pay them £30 per year for each member of staff to stay 'registered' and, apart from a rather unexciting magazine that is irrelevant to school trips, get nothing in the way of advice and guidance. They could pay a key role in being the place for schools to go for information about TO and organizing school ski trips, but alas they appear interested solely in the competitive side of the sport and just take the money. When asked a few years ago about helmets, they thought they had a policy somewhere. What they sent me was just about competition skiing, no useful advice at all.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

kevindonkleywood, Yes i was also there and did not find it amusing either, please do not tar all with same brush.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

leedsunited, So exactly why do you feel able to tar all teachers with the same brush?

And why respond to a post I deleted 24hrs previously?

You'll need to Register first of course.

If you read past comments you will note that don't tar all with same brush rolling eyes

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

leedsunited, as usual total bolluxs - bit like the team these days is it? Must be catching Laughing

After all it is free

Samerberg Sue, Bit harsh, I thought we had a decent season this year.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

Elizabeth B,

leedsunited - some people do things through a sense of altruism.

You know it makes sense.

leedsunited, 'due diligence' is a legal requirement and for a lot of trips there is no money to pay staff to do visits, so sadly its a choice of either the staff pay out their own pockets or the kids get no trip Sad

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

A snowHead

kevindonkleywood,

A snowHead

Elizabeth B, we are pissing in the wind here as we have two experts adjudicating on these topics (in the form of leedsunited and rayscoops), who have so much love and affection for anyone who does something for altruistic reasons, that it defies belief that we are even trying to counter their logic and explanations. We are condemned as dishonourable skivers, enjoying freebies at the cost of our students. wink

They of course, have never been so crass as to do something purely out of altruism. Such a dirty word - it surely is a wonder the profanity filter is able to cope with it.

We must humbly, gracefully and gratefully accept their judgement as, of course as they have repeatedly shown, they are all-knowing wise men of great renown and respected by all (excepts those miserable ungrateful miscreants who they have judged as lacking any scruples). Far be it for us to point out that the truth does sometimes stare them in the face - they are the experts at wielding the sword for our poor "blind Justice". We have been weighed and found wanting rolling eyes

We must accept our fate and be cut down to the correct size as well as being publicly humiliated whenever we have the temerity to question either their judgements or their rights to pontificate on subjects they know nothing about.

The truth is out there, our resident experts have said so. They have given it life, so we cannot argue against them.

And of course some of their best friends are teachers (kindly replace this word with one for which ever group they have their knives out for today), which proves they really do love these people. As a consequence of these friendships, they naturally have acquired all the knowledge required to be both judge and jury. wink

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Saurkraut Sue, So will that be a no then, they are not legaly required therefore do not have to take place unless "somebody else" is paying for them rolling eyes

The OP asked if these free trips are inducements and IMO and others yes they are.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Samerberg Sue, why do you have to be so rude ? I asked a specific question about a specific TO that has caused a lot of distress to many, but you seem inclined to ignore circumstances that do not fit in to your view on things. If you actually read through a few of threads rather than blindly dishing out insults you will see that there are many snowHeads who think there is an issue with 'some' inspection trips, not just myself and leedsunited. I have actually agreed that when such trips are administered in an appropraite manner then they are valid for the purpose of inspection.

SE/CR are the ones that failed to deliver their ski trips for what seems to be financial difficulties and they are the ones that also offer lavish trips that may well be a drain upon their resources. So I will ask you again and perhaps this time you may wish to answer in a polite manner. Do you think specifically SE inspection trips (based upon the above mentioned extracts for their web site) are set up with the emphasis on inducement rather than inspection ?

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

leedsunited, you are coming at this from the wrong angle. If an accident happens, and I end up in court, I have to demonstrate that I did everything within reason to prevent that accident.

A true story.....

The 1st year I ran the trip, we were in a remote location (no phone signal) and one of my kids had an asthma attack. We dealt with it, but decided that she needed to get to hospital pretty quickly.

Because I had done the pre-visit (paid for by myself) I knew exactly where the hospital was, knew that we would be within 5 mins drive of the hospital before we got back into phone reception, so made the decision pretty quickly that we would be faster to get her to hospital ourselves than to send someone off to phone for mountain rescue/an ambulance.

I can't say that without that knowledge she would have died, but I know that it gave me the confidence to make a swift decision to self-evacuate, where the "logical" decision is always to dial 999. I'm also fairly sure that had the worst happened, the judge at my trial would have reasonably asked why I had not visited the area beforehand.

The pre-visit for that trip consisted of me wild camping (remember, I was paying for it myself and doing it my own time), walking round with 4 mobile phones (1 for each network) and observing what the terrain would be like in different weather conditions. As part of a risk assessment I have to know what a valley will be like if the river is in spate - remember the girls from a school in Leeds who died our riverwalking in 2000? They considered bringing manslaughter charges against the teachers leading that trip due to an insufficient risk assessment. I know that I don't want to have to test out the legal process to determine what is "sufficient". And yes, sufficient risk assessment is a legal requirement.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Elizabeth B, I think what you describe is required, common sense and necessary and the fact that you do this for the enjoyment of others at your own expense is fantastic. However a ski trip to what effectively is a well equiped town with ski company reps actually travelling with the party etc is very much the other end of the scale with respect to what needs to be risk assessed.

Out of interest and this is a genuine question, if you were organising the same trip the year later, would you still feel you have the need to carry out such a similar level of inspection in the manner you describe, camping/checking mobile phone signals etc ?

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

rayscoops, go back and read my comments which were ignored at the beginning of the SE thread. I said then and I have repeated the statements that we (my PE Advisor and I) were concerned enough about Reynard's dubious practices that we jointly issued a warning to schools in our area about the company and it's practices.

The words once again "pot kettle black" spring to mind leedsunited. rolling eyes

After all it is free

leedsunited, PMSL As ever your detailed, expert knowledge is helping us gain a better understanding of teachers motivations, the law of risk assesment and seemingly on other threads data protection and distance selling regulations.

The LEA regulations for schools require a visit to be undertaken so yes for trip leaders it is the "Law" and not to have done one would very quickly lead to disciplinary action and in the event of an accident they would be liable in law for not having planned the trip with due dilligence.

Please explain how you carry out a risk assesment for an activity trip without seing the area you are visiting? rolling eyes

Oh! thats right you believe the brochures and website details?? after all no one would ever lie to take money off a school would they Shocked

That why many schools keep going back to the same destination, so they can just reuse and update their previous risk assesments.

I believe the Fire regulations were changed in 2006 and the old fire certificates were abolished, It is now a Risk assesment based process, so actually specific requirements are not prescribed in the law, but you would look pretty daft not having them as part of your mitigation measures for your risk assesment. Oh and on the subject of fire can you tell me that the Ski Hotel the kids are staying in has the proper measures in place for fire complience by looking in the brochure?

Are you now arguing that all risk assesment trips should be paid for? Where do you suggest that that money comes from? school bugets? or should schools just stop having trips? And I dont just mean ski trips? should All outdoor activity trips shold be stopped?

There are degrees in everything and there are packages that seek to lure with what amounts to bribery but that does not mean that every trip is the same, (paid for) family holidays as a risk assesment trip is I belive is taking the pee.

But an activity holiday with school kids with no site visit......best of luck if you ever consider a change of career to teaching.

rayscoops, No you would not have to do another visit so long as you could show that there had been no significant chnage in the risk profile of the subsequent visit.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

rayscoops,

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

kevindonkleywood,

snow reports

rayscoops,

You know it makes sense.

leedsunited, Not limited to Skiing, Geology field trips, Climbing activity holidays etc would have to include a visit also trips where there may be an overnight stay would also have a visit.

However at the risk of agreeing Very Happy

the likes of CR and SE type i'nducements' are probably there not to truely facilitate a quality risk assesment visit but possibly rather to encourage some risks to be overlooked.

Edit: The idea of pre-approved and assesed centres is a good one and some LEA's used to carry such lists, however the resources are now very limited and with the joy that is 'personal empowerment' the trip leaders and head teachers are now the ones that have to carry the liability if a problem occurs.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

kevindonkleywood, Many thanks that makes a lot of sense.

A snowHead

A snowHead

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

kevindonkleywood, A site visit would be the norm but we are talking about a drive to site that is paid for by the client (if it was overseas then I doubt it because it would be likely that there would be sufficient data available), but as with most construction projects the risk is more to do with method related issues with respect to future construction tasks and the main risks do not really relate to an empty site. The point I was trying to make is that I would be assessing the risk of something that has no physical form because the building activities would not have started - but in answer to your question so mainly dealing with drawings/specifications/method statements etc

Elizabeth B, my mate would be acting as the driver of the coach but not orgaining the trip, but he may well be the one that is responsible for the risk elements of parking, route, timescales etc. As an experienced transport professional he has the requisite knowledge to be able to consider and deal with that because he has driven the route before (although I doubt all the way to Wembley stadium), has satnav etc. and the information available to him is extensive. Personally I think the main risk is at the venue which they would not have been to before and is an uknown/unvisited building with 75,000 people in it, and the items that immedialtely come to mind are one like losing kids, football violence, falling over in the stadium etc.

The risk of apres/tobogganing injuries would perhaps be generic in nature and the risk not really site/resort/region/country specific in the same way the risks of a camping trip on the mountain side would be, imv.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

[quote=\"Samerberg Sue\"]leedsunited, I\'m an ex-teacher because I was injured during my service and had to retire on grounds of ill-health. I continued to help my students even when I was retired because I cared about them - that\'s the same for many of my colleagues I am not unique nor do I claim to be. I still teach here in Germany on a voluntary basis because I love teaching and it seems I\'m relatively good at it. [/quote]

I know people who have had their limbs blown off, but after recovering as much as they can they actually manage to get back to work.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Tobogganing is a weird one. Bum boarding at the bottom of the nursery slope is how many teachers imagine tobogganing to be, and they get a shock when they actually go on an Austrian toboggan run. I witnessed a school insist that they wanted to go tobogganing (against gentle advice otherwise), with no idea of what was involved. The kids went up the mountain unsupervised and then slid down a pretty scary track. It was 9pm, freezing cold, pitch dark and an accident could easily have happened. This was at an organised centre. If a risk assessment visit had taken place then I have no doubt whatsoever that the school would not have visited that centre.

There was an incident a number of years back where a number of British teenagers died in Austria while tobogganing on a school trip. There have sadly been other cases since. Sad

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Elizabeth B, I remember riding my board down an empty track which turned out to be quite a fast taboggan ride - I could hardly stay within it when I hit a hairpin bend - good fun though

After all it is free

PJSki,

One of my school friend was tragically killled in a toboggan accident over 25 years ago when the party of 3fell off a cliff. School trips back then were outrage us, I recall drunken teachers and ski poles hollowed out with kids sipping brandy, we had the resort to ourselves and were free to roam any pistes we chose and I was by far the best skier on one trip aged 13! Things have changed but some of the new health and safety requirements have gone a bit bonkers.

My wife is currently organsing a school exchange with a spanish school. The Spanish are frustrated by the English over complications and some of their rules are quite strange to us as there are many cultural differences. I am not so sure that English parents would approve of teachers sleeping in the same rooms and playing cards to way past midnight but then Spanish kids do this at home and find a 10.00 bedtime very strange( most of them mig be having their evening meal at this time!) so my wifes work this week has been finely tuning risk assessments and police checks. Next year the LEA is threatening asking for police checks from all parents... Which might prove difficult obtaining from the Spanish parents. So 8 kids are going to go away , my wife has worked her butt off for this trip arranging the details and making sure every eventuality si catered for. She is a part time head of languages contracted to 20 hours a week she has done at least60 over the last few weeks is 4 months pregnant but is determined that the kids gone on the exchange as it's such a worthwhile exercise. However the workload has been huge! But fundamentally worth it for the kids education. She doesn't claim overtime she won't get days back in lieu but she is happy knowing that 8 kids will have a great experience and fuel their desire to learn languages.

Sorry about spelling mistakes my iPad is bonkers!

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

[quote=\"leedsunited\"]PJSki,

Help!!

Are teacher's trips to inspect ski resorts 'inducements'?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste