 Poster: A snowHead
|
| horgand wrote: |
I really don't see how anyone would adjudge the reps as being remunerated.
So what if their flights, hotel, ski pass & some expenses are covered... |
You've answered your own question there. Remuneration is not just cash earned from doing something. If it is something that would cost a large amount of money to do, and they are getting that for free in return for putting a few hours in guiding people, that is remuneration.
In a very similar way the flights, hotel, ski pass and a few beers are covered for TO hosts, they don't make enough money for it to go further than that. So they are in a really very similar position and I can see why the French courts see it the same way.
FWIW, I disagree with them banning either, but the SCGB can't argue that they are not remunerating their reps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Mistress Panda wrote: |
| horgand wrote: |
I really don't see how anyone would adjudge the reps as being remunerated.
So what if their flights, hotel, ski pass & some expenses are covered... |
You've answered your own question there. Remuneration is not just cash earned from doing something. If it is something that would cost a large amount of money to do, and they are getting that for free in return for putting a few hours in guiding people, that is remuneration.
In a very similar way the flights, hotel, ski pass and a few beers are covered for TO hosts, they don't make enough money for it to go further than that. So they are in a really very similar position and I can see why the French courts see it the same way.
FWIW, I disagree with them banning either, but the SCGB can't argue that they are not remunerating their reps. |
Under UK employment law, yes, but this is French employment law.
I recall something regarding seasonal workers in France, but I can't find it again so am asking others to confirm it's veracity :
that is, if you are a seasonal worker, in an area that you do not normally reside, that accommodation and similar things (e.g. perhaps lift pass in this instance) do not become considered benefits in kind as they are required for you to carry out your work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Remember that in the Le Ski case, the bulk of the fine was about unpaid social charges, paying below the minimum wage and working too many hours. I still believe that if the French go after the SCGB ,the unqualified guiding offences will only be a footnote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
albinomountainbadger, crikey. I thought they didn't have much of a leg to stand on ref the guiding, but if the French decide to go after them on tax avoidance it might get properly messy. I certainly wouldn't be surprised if a rep guiding all day, meeting members in the bar during the evening, and doing a bit of paperwork and reporting home could easily go over the working hours stuff which the French are rather hot on.
I suspect, as I did right at the beginning of all this, that the solution is to hire a local guide and pay them, requiring dramatically fewer SCGB reps in resort, just one co-ordinator in each ski area really, and the reduced cost from not subsidising a load of people on their jollies would cover the local guides rates easily for the number of skiers that actually use the service.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| feef wrote: |
Under UK employment law, yes, but this is French employment law.
|
Thinking about it, the SCGB is a UK registered company, however much it attempts to portray itself as a members club, and as a result might find themselves in some difficulty regarding UK employment law as well...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mistress Panda wrote: |
| I suspect, as I did right at the beginning of all this, that the solution is to hire a local guide and pay them, requiring dramatically fewer SCGB reps in resort, just one co-ordinator in each ski area really, and the reduced cost from not subsidising a load of people on their jollies would cover the local guides rates easily for the number of skiers that actually use the service. |
One "co ordinator" is what they do anyways isnt it ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[quote="limegreen1"]
| Mistress Panda wrote: |
| I suspect, as I did right at the beginning of all this, that the solution is to hire a local guide and pay them, requiring dramatically fewer SCGB reps in resort, just one co-ordinator in each ski area really, and the reduced cost from not subsidising a load of people on their jollies would cover the local guides rates easily for the number of skiers that actually use the service. |
Only one "co ordinator" in resort is what they have anyways isnt it ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
[quote="limegreen1"][quote="Mistress Panda"]I suspect, as I did right at the beginning of all this, that the solution is to hire a local guide and pay them, requiring dramatically fewer SCGB reps in resort, just one co-ordinator in each ski area really, and the reduced cost from not subsidising a load of people on their jollies would cover the local guides rates easily for the number of skiers that actually use the service.[/quote
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
albinomountainbadger, Thanks for that clarification. I don't know where I saw it, but I definitely saw it.. But then, everything you read on the internet is true 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I'm off to Wimbledon on Nov 16th to do my annual refresher, I'm sure there'll be something to report back with........
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Mistress Panda wrote: |
| horgand wrote: |
I really don't see how anyone would adjudge the reps as being remunerated.
So what if their flights, hotel, ski pass & some expenses are covered... |
You've answered your own question there. Remuneration is not just cash earned from doing something. If it is something that would cost a large amount of money to do, and they are getting that for free in return for putting a few hours in guiding people, that is remuneration
FWIW, I disagree with them banning either, but the SCGB can't argue that they are not remunerating their reps. |
You deleted my reasoning why things like a ski pass, and partial expensing of flights& hotels are covered, because the reps could not offer the service if these costs of providing the service were not actually covered.
E.g under your interpretation, in my local sailing club, is the volunteer driving the safety boat, adjudgeable as being remunerated cos they get to spend the day driving a rib on the ocean, and that normally costs people money?
Are volunteer drivers being paid?
Club coaches who get wet gear, coach trips to matches (whoppee)??
Etc, etc
I.e. is any volunteer who has any expense paid to provide their service actually being remunerated!? I don't think so.
IMHO they are clearly not being remunerated, when what they are receiving is being used to provide the actual service.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mistress Panda wrote: |
| feef wrote: |
Under UK employment law, yes, but this is French employment law.
|
Thinking about it, the SCGB is a UK registered company, however much it attempts to portray itself as a members club, and as a result might find themselves in some difficulty regarding UK employment law as well... |
As for your spurious point about not being a club, because it is incorporated as a company (I'm assuming that's a not for profit company,btw, which of course you conveniently neglect to mention) well I think that's just obfuscation really. Clubs, charities and all sorts of not for profit entities incorporate themselves as all sorts of entities in order to provide their services in the best manner possible to their members. In brief, it's irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
horgand, don't know how to break this to you, but as far as legal responsibility goes and being registered in the UK with employees in the UK it is quite definitely not irrelevant, but thanks for the misinformed patronising tone. The fact that the club has become a company presumably to limit liability and other commercial reasons comes with a downside. Welcome to the downside.
In the examples you present above, if the benefit is disproportionate to the service offered, then that becomes renumeration.The law might decide that the club is effectively employing members to do work for them for free, gaining financially from it, and not paying them the minimum wage for their work. Alternatively they might decide the benefit is worth more than the minimum wage in benefit and therefore they are being renumerated...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Did we ever get to the bottom of how the Club Alpin Francais handles this? I believe that it has central office employees/infrastructure and arranges member-led tours and manages to do so without getting in trouble. Not sure what perks, if any, the member/leaders get
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Mistress Panda wrote: |
horgand, don't know how to break this to you, but as far as legal responsibility goes and being registered in the UK with employees in the UK it is quite definitely not irrelevant, but thanks for the misinformed patronising tone. The fact that the club has become a company presumably to limit liability and other commercial reasons comes with a downside. Welcome to the downside.
In the examples you present above, if the benefit is disproportionate to the service offered, then that becomes renumeration.The law might decide that the club is effectively employing members to do work for them for free, gaining financially from it, and not paying them the minimum wage for their work. Alternatively they might decide the benefit is worth more than the minimum wage in benefit and therefore they are being renumerated... |
I don't know how to break this to you (patronising enough for you yet!?  ), but you have answered your own question there already (ah yes ,that should do it ! ).
You have changed your position between posts: in the earlier post you categorically stated that the expense payments made to enable the reps provide their service is remuneration. In the last post, you have conceded that this is arguable, e.g. 'the court might......', and that is precisely my position all along. And we are demonstrating here, it is very arguable actually, and without being au fait with the workings of French law (thank God ), I think it is likely the scgb will win this one.
On the issue of the scgb having employees implying minimum wages, tax avoidance and all that other nonsense for their volunteer reps, clubs all over the world have employees and volunteers operating alongside each other every day. It works fine for all those other millions of clubs so why not the scgb!? Having employees does not preclude you from utilising volunteered services from your members, so with the above proviso re French law, I don't see that one featuring in a ruling either.
From other posts here, it seems there's other French clubs and organisations that provide all sorts of services along a simular model to the scgb. So I don't see French courts setting a legal precedent to make all these other society's unviable overnight in order to uphold 1 spurious & heavy handed claim by 1 branch of the ESF in 1 ski village. Now I may be wrong on this of course, but I believe common sense would indicate a high probability of success for the SCGB..
(As well as the fact that the Esf side had to seek an adjournment as they didn't have their case prepared after 6 months!!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Arno wrote: |
| Did we ever get to the bottom of how the Club Alpin Francais handles this? I believe that it has central office employees/infrastructure and arranges member-led tours and manages to do so without getting in trouble. Not sure what perks, if any, the member/leaders get |
They are not skiing around on piste hawhawing away in brightly coloured jackets attracting attention to themselves for one thing.
I don't know why the SCGB is suddenly under the spot light however I bet when the rep who was arrested started explaining who paid for everything and how it all worked the Gendarme probably thought he'd come across a case of human traffiking or something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
In fact you can imagine the conversation....
Gendarme: okay, so let me get zis clear. You work 6 days a week, you start at 9am and spend the day, rain, shine or snow, skeeing around zee pistes with some Engleesh numpteez who ski like zee goats right?
Rep: yah
Gendarme: This despite the fact that you are a good skier, clearly competent on and off the marked ski runs?
Rep: er yah
Gendarme: Zen, you get back to your hotel, get dressed up then host an evening drinks pimping for members for the ski club while having to listen to members and potential members boring stories?
Rep: yah yah
Gendarme: you 'ave to wear this jacket which violates all laws of mountain fashion?
Rep: er yah
Gendarme: and you do this for 2 months of the year?
Rep: yes that's it
Gendarme: and you pay zees Ski Club company for the priviledge of being a rep?
Rep: er yah
Gendarme: and zey pay you.... nothing!
Rep: yes
Gendarme: Sir, you are clearly being exploited by these people!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| davidof wrote: |
| Arno wrote: |
| Did we ever get to the bottom of how the Club Alpin Francais handles this? I believe that it has central office employees/infrastructure and arranges member-led tours and manages to do so without getting in trouble. Not sure what perks, if any, the member/leaders get |
They are not skiing around on piste hawhawing away in brightly coloured jackets attracting attention to themselves for one thing.
I don't know why the SCGB is suddenly under the spot light however I bet when the rep who was arrested started explaining who paid for everything and how it all worked the Gendarme probably thought he'd come across a case of human traffiking or something. |
moral of the story is to take people to really gnarly unpatrolled areas and they probably won't bump into any gendarmes
I used to organise tours for a UK ski touring club and got a contribution to expenses from them. I certainly wouldn't have seen that as "remuneration" and it certainly wasn't adequate given the hassle involved. I also rail slightly at the idea that this is nefarious or irresponsible. Some people are OK with being treated as adults and just want someone with a bit of knowledge to show them some interesting places. Some people want to learn from experienced amateurs and some experienced amateurs enjoy the opportunity to give a bit back. I bet 90%+ of professional guides had their first experiences of climbing or backcountry skiing with experienced friends or relatives, rather than with professional guides and quite right too IMV
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Have I told the motorbike story before?
Well as this thread is a rehash here it is again anyway: A French business associate of my summer employers was recently telling us about being booked for 'travail dissumulé'. This is when the authorities think you are paying people off the books, or what the French call 'au black'.
He is currently looking at a few thousand euro fine, with prison and forced closure of his business as possible but unlikely extras.
He owns a motorbike garage and his crime was to let a friend take one out on a joyride, asking him to give it a once over at the the jet-wash on the way back.
The Gendarmes stopped the rider a couple of km away during a random document check and asked why he was riding a bike that wasn't legally his - remember in France you must have all papers on you 24/7.
The reply "it’s my friend's, I'm just going to wash it for him" was fine for the gendarmes that day but made its way back up to the URSSAF, the almighty inspectorate that controls everything in the French employment law bible.
A crack inspection team (including a retired gendarme) promptly arrived to charge the garage owner with having an undeclared employee.
The rider never heard any more about it but today, three years on, the garage owner is still shuttling between tribunals and amassing some lovely legal bills.
The moral here is of course 'never let a friend lend you a hand if you have a French business', but also that what you may consider to be reasonable, just and sensible is 100% irrelevant!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
davidof, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have been a SCGB member for half a century and have never skied with or even seen a SCGB Rep. But then I usually ski in Scotland, the poor dears are far too fragile to venture so far North! So my SCGB membership fee does not cover a rep's wages. The French are well known for making up their own rules and arresting anyone who does not comply. For 'comply' read 'looks like they may take business away from them'. When on the continent of Europe I ski in Austria.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Until now I have read all this with a little laugh. Now just to through something in thebmix for all you experts of the scgb posting here. The scgb is a limited comoany, no question of this. The fresh tracks holidays is a tour compant and also has some slightly different name for accounting purposes (sorry cannot remember the correct title), but when annual accounts are submited and published they are combined. It is clear from these accounts that Fresh Tracks does make a profit which is then used to support the club side of the business including the leaders programme. These are the basic facts as I understand them from reading the accounts.
My question. Since leaders as they are called now work (yes work is the correct word) on the Fresh Tracks holiday basiclly doing the job of a normal tour company rep in resort in return for free board, food, transport, ski pass and sometimes free use of gear if needed. How is this different to what a tour company skirep or ski host did?
Now read carefully the discription of what the scgb ambassodors will be doing. Sound to me just the same as a tour company rep in resort under a different name with the same benefits as a leader with Fresh Tracks.
So please explain how a Tour company rep or ski host cannot do his job unless paid a proper french wage and if skiing have the on piste qualification of at least a stagiere according to the recent court judgment and yet some of you argue here that the work is different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| snowcrazy wrote: |
Until now I have read all this with a little laugh. Now just to through something in the mix for all you experts of the scgb posting here. The scgb is a limited company, no question of this. The fresh tracks holidays is a tour company and also has some slightly different name for accounting purposes (sorry cannot remember the correct title), but when annual accounts are submitted and published they are combined for members to review. It is clear from these accounts that Fresh Tracks does make a profit which is then used to support the club side of the business including the leaders programme. All members of the ski club also pay a membership fee which whether they use the leaxers programme or notcis is used in part to pay for this advertised service. Both for members and potential members in resorts plus for all those that attended Fresh Tracks holidays. All people that wish to go on a Fresh Tracks holiday MUST join the ski club as part of the add on charges for the holiday. A person going on a fresh tracks holiday cannot opt out of joining the club at the same time. These are the basic facts as I understand them from reading the accounts.
My question. Since leaders as they are called now work (yes work is the correct word) on the Fresh Tracks holiday basiclly doing the job of a normal tour company rep in resort in return for free board, food, transport, ski pass and sometimes free use of gear if needed. How is this different to what a tour company skirep or ski host did?
Now read carefully the discription of what the scgb ambassodors will be doing. Sound to me just the same as a tour company rep in resort under a different name with the same benefits as a leader with Fresh Tracks.
So please explain how a Tour company rep or ski host cannot do his job unless paid a proper french wage and if skiing have the on piste qualification of at least a stagiere according to the recent court judgment and yet some of you argue here that the work is different. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
The ski club is a club and the services of the leader and the fresh tracks trips are only available to club members. Not members of the public, unlike TOs
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@feef, that is not really correct. You are forced to be a membver of the club to go on a Fresh Tracks holiday and any lawyer with half a brain will see that this is just trying to be a clever way of getting round a law. You can ski with a leader in resort without being a member once in a 6 day holiday. This is done to attract members, effectively clever sales method for increasing membership. I think a judge in France will see through that very easily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the double post. But the thing to click so I can edit my post which is normally on the right is not there. Anyone know why?
Here is what I was trying to post with corrections.
Corrected text.
Until now I have read all this with a little laugh. Now just to add something in the mix for all you experts of the scgb posting here. The scgb is a limited company, no question of this. The fresh tracks holidays is a tour company and also has some slightly different name for accounting purposes (sorry cannot remember the correct title), but when annual accounts are submitted and published they are combined for members to review. It is clear from these accounts that Fresh Tracks does make a profit which is then used to support the club side of the business including the leaders programme. All members of the ski club also pay a membership fee which whether they use the leaders programme or not is part of this fee they pay and this money is used to pay for this advertised service. All members are therefore indirectly paying for the leaders service both for members and potential members in resorts plus for all those that attended Fresh Tracks holidays.
All people that wish to go on a Fresh Tracks holiday MUST join the ski club as part of the add on charges for the holiday. A person going on a fresh tracks holiday cannot opt out of joining the club at the same time. They are in effect forced to join the club even if they do not wish to do so in order to attend the holiday. They must then cancel there membership charge for the coming year or it will just keep being paid by direct debit. These are the basic facts as I understand them from reading the accounts.
My question. Since leaders as they are called work (yes work is the correct word) on the Fresh Tracks holiday doing the job of a normal tour company rep in resort in return for free board, food, transport, ski pass and sometimes free use of gear if needed. How is this different to what a tour company ski rep or ski host did?
Now read carefully the description of what the scgb ambassodors will be doing. Sounds to me just the same as a tour company rep in resort under a different name with the same benefits as a leader with Fresh Tracks.
So please explain how a Tour company rep or ski host cannot do his job unless paid a proper french wage and if skiing have the on piste qualification of at least a stagiere according to the recent court judgment and yet some of you argue here that the work is different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
To expand on my answer to @feef, above. If you are paying for a service through your club membership fee or holiday fee and this service is advertized as an intergal part of what the holiday or club provides. Then you are offering a direct service in relation to the money that a person pays and as a limited company that is a business arrangement not a voluntary agreement. Even if the SCGB is a Limited (not for profit) Company this is a service the company are contracting to offer for money that has been received. What the comnpany (Club?) gives it's leaders in return for their work is payment in kind. If people could opt out of this service then it would be an option and not a condition of membership or part of the holiday contract. But as it is built into the whole package then it is very difficult to claim it is just a members optional service. I think only the courts can sort this out. I shall now sit back and continue reading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@snowcrazy, effectively the point you make is that if TOs want to carry on running guides then they just need to get us to join "Club TO" at the start of their holiday if we want to use the guiding service, and that might last for 12 months, maybe longer, for some tiny nominal fee that the TO can swallow as part of their operating costs but somehow split it out when you book your holiday. Or if that isn't going to work, the SCGB doesn't really have a case either. I imagine, as you have suggested, that any judge worth his salt will see straight through the two organisations that are the SCGB and Freshtracks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Please can we move this thread to 'The Piste' section as I have just been told that as it is in the news section that is why you cannot edit what you post plus lots more people would read this thread if it was in the main piste section. OR is it one of the reasons why it is here as not to many people bother to look here. I hardly ever read this section. I saw the link on the other thread and came here. Now the other thread on the piste section is closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
See, cannot add the question, WHY? to the end of what I just wrote in the message above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Hmmm Snowcrazy,
You make some interesting points, and yes they are arguable, as they no doubt will be in court, but your points remind me of the way Club Med is set up. For those unfamiliar with Club Med holidays, they basically run all inclusive, mostly sports based (including skiing actually) activities in 'clubs' all over the world. (Very similar to Mark Warner for ye Brits). But there's a few interesting parallels here I think:
1. Club Med insist you become a member to go to one of their resorts
2. The reps they use are called 'GOs' , and these tend to be college age kids who get room, board and some expenses to work bloody hard for a year or 2
3. Iirc Club Med is set up as a not for profit Societe (company), in France
The reason I bring all this up is, it would surprise me at all that the reason that club med are structured this way(I.e. members, not for profit, etc) is probably to comply with French employment law while effectively paying their GOs sweet f all cash..
And IF this is the case, then it seems to non lawyer me, that the SCGB have yet another French example of Club type services being offered in part exchange for effectively holiday expenses I.e. room & board, etc. And IF this is the case, then I don't see any French judge issuing a ruling that would potentially close Club Med facilities all over France & around the rest of the globe. But I could be wrong of course. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Hi Horgand,
Do you know any of this for a fact? As far as I can tell Club Med comply with French minimul wage legislation and hours for seasonal workers, at least in France. Club Med were one of the original prosecutions for leading groups on piste without using a qualified instructor and all on snow activities use instructors these days. I doubt they would get French people to work for the without paying as there is too much other work in the Alps during the winter. Again as far as I can tell they are a normal plc, are quoted on the Paris stock exchange and pay a dividend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
OMG Scoooooped! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@horgand, You make some interesting points as well re. Club Med. I know quite a bit about how they work as someone I know was (not sure if he is this season) responsible for there ski training programme in Les Arcs, however I am not sure everything you have stated is actually correct re. there structure or better called, 'their business model'. I shall ask next time I see my friend and post what I am told.
Re Ski Instruction/Leading. @davidof, is correct. Some time ago they had problems themselves re. ski instruction/leading.
Their current situation is now very different to the one you have described.
Point 1. I can confirm that currently to the best of my knowledge all the Club Med Ski leaders are considered qualified Instructors within the French system, at the very least having already passed the 'Stagieres ski technique test' and basic safety module which is the minimum for the French ESF Instructors to work on the mountain.
With all respect to SCGB leaders. there are not many of them that could (or would want to I suspect) take and pass this kind of test.
Point 2. Regarding Off Piste skiing (even quite near to the piste), only those fully certified as ESF Instructors or others approved by ski authorities recognised in France can take paying customers off piste more than a few metres officially at least. Quite often Club Med use High Mountain Guides for even simple routes around Les Arcs and the Paradiski area. Their top Instructors and Guides also do the much harder routes with advanced groups. I often meet them on the Bellecote North Face or behind the Aiguille Rouge.
Point 3. From my experience of skiing with Club Med groups sometimes. Their groups are arranged according to ability levels. One of the other biggest differences with SCGB is that when they go OFF PISTE, they normally give each member of the group a back pack containing Probes and shovel plus each person wears an avalanche transceiver.
The SCGB still does not give full safety kit to members, yet allows them to go off piste with only a transceiver. Going off piste with just a transceiver is a joke. I believe all experts would agree with me on this point. If the lack of proper safety equipment does come out in the court case then I predict at the very least that the judge will declare this 'unsafe practise' and forbid SCGB leaders from going off piste in the future.
For those following this thread. These are the facts about Club Med ski policy which were not explained by @horgand, so as you can see even if they are constituted in a similar way to SCGB they run there ski programme in a very different way. If the judge rules against SCGB it is unlikely to have any effect on Club Med holiday ski programme.
The financial problems of club med which has been mentioned by @Comedy Goldsmith, are a different issue.
At the end of the day. Both Club Med and SCGB are businesses not clubs in the true sense of the word and therefore are governed by company law in France IMO. I think that is the main issue. If SCGB is seen as a business by the judge then they must comply with French Company law, which it is clear at present they do not IMO. I guess we will all have to wait and see what happens in the court next month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@admin, please can you move this thread to the PISTE section so that more people are aware of this interesting discussion and take part if they wish. I for one hardly ever visit the News section as most interesting things are posted in the Piste section.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read in local press a while back that the ESF and Club Med had signed an agreement on something.
Here we go, something in English: http://www.clubmed-corporate.com/?cat=218
| Quote: |
| Ski resorts: ski lift tickets and group lessons included, partnership with ESF in France. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
