Ski instruction in France

A snowHead

When I took a lesson in France the instructor said he spoke English and he did speak a bit but his English wasn't good enough to get across all he wanted to explain. His strong French accent made it very difficult to understand his limited English. It doesn't matter how good the teacher is, if he/she can't communicate with the student then teaching levels will suffer.

Just to be fair and to maintain high teaching standards, shouldn't French ski instructors who wish to teach English students pass an English language test? (Conducted by an English examining body).

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

DB, to an extent that is already the case - although the English Examining Board thing doesn't make much difference at the levels required. A degree in Mandarin Chinese is hardly worthless just because it's not awarded by the University of Beijing.

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

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Mark Hunter, the simple answer is that your hypothetical holidaymaker has no way of knowing if it should take a week to learn to snowplough or not and then no way of personally judging the quality of instruction.

You'll need to Register first of course.

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

After all it is free

laundryman - A question... or three. What ratio would you consider acceptable in a hypothetical ski school with, say, just two qualified instructors? 1 qualified instructor to 5 trainees? 10? 25?

Is there no point at which you would consider it necessary to draw a line and say, beyond this point would clearly be a blatant attempt to circumvent the law, exploit a loophole? Do you believe the safety consideration to be a red herring? Do you think that training standards should only be up to the ski schools concerned, with no regulation whatsoever? If not, who is qualified to draw the line, and where?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

laundryman, Ok then. The obvious follow-up questions to my earlier points, given your answers...

- Which professions should be subject to regulatory controls of standards, and what are the defining elements that separate these professions from those you consider should be self-regulated?

PG, I fondly imagined that all professions are regulated.

You know it makes sense.

Too long in France - the French expression being "métier réglementé" which implies standards laid down by central government.....

A couple of my jobs in France being translation (not regulated) and freight forwarding/transport (regulated). The latter being open to any Tom Dick or Harry in the UK...

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

PG, I think the obvious cases are where the generality of the population are subject to risks where they have no direct control over the operator, and cannot reasonably mitigate the risks. So, an airline passenger may carefully choose his own carrier, but has not the slightest control over other planes in the sky and it is not reasonable to expect him not to fly to lessen his risk from rogue pilots. It therefore seems sensible that the whole of society club together, via national government and supra-national bodies, to ensure that all pilots are rigorously trained. This must involve the law invoking specific standards. Another example would be gas fitters, who by faulty workmanship could cause an explosion that might demolish neighbouring properties.

A secondary class is where people may not be capable of making a reasoned decision for themselves, due to their condition or circumstances. I'm thinking of the cowboy builder who tells a little old lady she needs a new roof when there's a missing tile, or the cowboy plumber who exploits the fact there's a spurting leak to charge an outrageous price. I think these cases are best dealt with by general laws relating to deception, misrepresentation, etc, simply because it's too much work for the legislature to formulate specific regulations for a myriad of different occupations (especially as new occupations come into being all the time).

Now, I don't think ski instruction falls into either of these classes. The first class would be to do with risks to which we are subject from poorly trained skiers. Since we put up with completely untrained skiers, it seems odd to legislate standards for those who have taken the responsible action of getting some training. In any case, snow sports are a minority activity for which the risks are not that great. There are ways we can mitigate our own risks, for example by getting good training ourselves which teaches ways of avoiding the idiots. If safety on the pistes is an issue (and I don't deny it needs looking at, continuously) then I think it is counterproductive to address it in a way that is likely to decrease the choice and availability and increase the price of such training. It would surely be more effective, and the costs borne more fairly (by all users, not just those responsible enough to seek training), if more piste patrollers were employed to deter and punish reckless behaviour. It would have a side-benefit of providing more career opportunities to excellent skiers.

Neither do purchasers of ski instruction fall into second class of occupation for which some form (preferably indirect) regulation is required. Most will be in the prime of life, in full possession of their mental and physical faculties. In other words, perfectly capable of making their own decisions and not easily intimidated or conned. Even if they are, the risks they run are frankly not that great. I'd rather not cede all decisions of that nature to a supposedly all-knowing state. I think I know my own requirements better than they, and I'm prepared to make the odd mistake along the way. I am over 18.

A snowHead

laundryman, nicely put - agree with you 100%

A snowHead

laundryman,

Even in market economies, the State is a major player in economic life. Defence – education – police, regulatory measures are everywhere.

You’ve given two reasons for intervention, but you’ve missed some out. A key one is imperfection in the functioning of the marketplace. This may have two very different consequences: either it prevents competition in the sector concerned, or it permits it, but with inefficient or undesirable results. The existence of a natural monopoly is a form of market imperfection – eg in the electricity or water industries, where competition has to be artificially created, being fundamentally “anti-economic”.

Other functional imbalances in the marketplace are the result of external factors, such as environmental, hygiene, security issues. You touched on these. Where certain potentially harmful actions do not result in direct consequences for those responsible, regulatory measures are required. This is the key issue as far as the French are concerned.

One final dysfunction results from imbalance in knowledge and expertise – where the seller knows considerably more about his product than the buyer. There is an argument, mentioned by ise, that this applies in ski instruction, but I'll concentrate on the safety/security question in this response.

The main regulated sectors are affected by more than one of the above. Gas, water, telecommunications…

The danger is that these can be used as a pretext to control an activity, such as in the transport of passengers by air. Of course it is important to guarantee security and safety. However, on a worldwide basis, these measures were once used to fix tariffs, and indirectly, the number and financial stability of airlines. So, how to ensure the correct balance is found? Should we let competition and globalization alone guide the process? Obviously not.

Part of the problem is that the issue under discussion in this thread is mainly being looked at from a British perspective. There is little sensitivity to, or understanding of the local environment, the political culture, the national framework, the specifics of the profession concerned in a French context.

Is France alone in imposing substantial regulatory measures? Hardly! It may seem rather a paradox, but throughout the world deregulation and interventionism cohabit surprisingly well in a large number of sectors – financial markets being a prime example.

Anyway, back to ski instruction! Firstly, not many people are aware that alpine ski instruction falls under the “sports educator” denomination. The French hold that a sports educator – across a broad range of activities - is a responsible position involving numerous safety and security issues, particularly with respect to the supervision and teaching of children. This applies throughout the whole sports domain – sailing, tennis, judo, football, diving; approximately 70 different sports in all. Although there are no direct links with the qualifications required to teach sport in schools and colleges, it is the same fundamental philosophy at work, and there are equivalences for sports educators with the BEES diploma to enter state education.

Perceived to be an offshoot of the teaching profession, as is the case with state education, it was seen as a natural step to apply national technical and pedagogical standards to all the disciplines involved.

To sum up. Teaching is a profession, and just as you would expect your school sports teacher to be professionally qualified to a certain standard as he/she is responsible for the health and welfare as well as the correct training of your children, the French believe that those exercising a similar role outside the school gates should be subject to the same professional demands.

They see the exploitation of loopholes such as the ski school trainee status as blatant dilution of those standards they consider to be a core principle of the profession of sports educator.

Whether in skiing, or in any other activity involving the teaching of a sport, especially where adults are in charge of children in loco parentis, the French believe that the best guarantor of uniform standards is the state. They consider that a free-for-all, deregulated approach to activities involving health, safety and educational elements would be totally irresponsible. You will find only a minute minority of French people that would entertain the possibility of self-regulation in a teaching field involving health and safety issues, especially when it affects such a large number of young people under the age of 18.

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

PG, thank you for putting across some complex issues in such a coherent fashion.

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

PG, I'm happy to agree with most of the above. The regulation of monopolies is interesting - and not a little germane. I think I'm right in saying that the need for it was first espoused by Marx, and yet has been taken up by most capitalist countries and particularly enthusiastically by the United States of all places.

You know that I've harped on myself about cultural differences between Britain and France. I do think it explains a lot, and we're as well to show some sensitivity towards each other. The interesting thing is whether/how these clashes will get ironed out at the EU level. In the meantime, British people can of course vote with their feet and, with the collapsing dollar, I think it could be as well for the powers that be in France to be flexible towards their strange Anglo-Saxon-Celtic neighbours, with their attachment to individual liberty, at this time!

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

PG, Well put.

laundryman, Do you really think that any unqualified holiday skier (however experienced) should be encouraged to teach anyone they want to and be paid for it? What about danger from avalanches? What about terrain selection? What about how fast to ski for each level/client? What about which sort of turns to make? What about the mechanics of the turn? What about which skis to use? What about mountain lore? I could go on for ever!!
I see disasters every day of every winter (no exaggeration) with people teaching their friends and loved ones. The poor tutee usually ends up put off for life, hurt or worse.

I'm proud to be qualified to work in France where I'm considered a professional in my chosen profession. I was glad to get away from the "ski bum" culture of the UK. Hooray for French laws!! Laughing

It's a pity they're no longer enforcing them with the same zeal they used 15 years ago.

BTW it costs £5 -10,000 to get through all the Ski Teaching exams and courses, and this applies to the French as well.

You'll need to Register first of course.

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

laundryman, Ok, but by inference, if the regulation is not required because there is not sufficient perception of danger etc. then clearly any Tom, Dick or Harry could do it. There is plenty of choice within the existing laws in France, you only have to look for it.

After all it is free

easiski, I don't think Tom, Dick or Harry would prosper for very long. While they did, I suspect the damage they would do would be slight compared to "mates" who either put people off for life or teach them to ski out of control or other bad habits.

As for plenty of choice, who is to say what is enough, the consumer or the producer?

laundryman,

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

PG, I believe in liberal democracy where majorities don't willy-nilly impose their thinking on minorities.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Ah, I'm with you now, the kind of democracy where you're happy to accept the express wishes of the majority as long as they conform with your own. wink

snow reports

I have to say, this thread is turning into an extremely eloquently argued discussion on the pros and cons of regulation of the ski instruction industry, and I'm finding it highly educational. My congratulations to all parties. Very Happy

From my point of view, the minute that money starts to change hands, it implies a much higher standard of "duty of care" than is needed for a purely friendly favour. Inherent in this duty of care is the need to comply with an accepted standard of professional qualifications, which has to be monitored and administered by a governing body, be this the state, a professional association, or some other independant body. When this involves a combination of a potentially risky activity, along with the pastoral care of minors and other vulnerable people, at some point the populous as a whole will call for state regulation, either before, or after a tragedy has happened. I believe this to be the case with outward bounds instructors in the UK following some tragedies on school trips. This is generally thought to be a good thing, and long overdue. This case has many parallels with ski instruction in France. With any form of legislation, loopholes will always be found, and people will always try to exploit them, it is the job of the legislature to close them as they are found, and this would seem to be what is happening in France.

To balance this, we have to look at the issue of ski instruction in France from a historical perspective. It is only in fairly recent years that the ESF has started to accept competition from independant outfits, and not always with good grace. A small minority have brought the name of the ESF into disrepute by using underhand tactics to try and drive out competition from their resorts, leading to the stories of cars being set on fire and the like, whilst the vast majority have accepted the opening of the market, and quite rightly, have tried to maintain their market share by all means within the law. A common complaint is that the ESF don't play fair with the competition, which seems to be an unrealistic expectation, as after all they are a business, and are in competition with their competitors rather than in cooperation with them, it is to be expected that they would use any advantage that they have.

To further complicate things is the reputation of the surly ESF ski instructor, which deserved or undeserved, is a reputation that they have amongst a significant proportion of British skiers. My experience in this area, is that usually when there is a complaint about someone who is providing a service to the public, it almost always comes down to poor communication. Communication is a two way thing, and I would remind us all, we are talking about a service in France, in an earlier post, someone complains about the instructors English being spoken with a thick French accent, and suggests language testing by an English examination board for all those who want to teach English people to ski! This displays massive levels of cultural arrogance, firstly by assuming that the majority of people wanting tuition are English, and secondly by assuming that it is the duty of the French to learn better English, rather than the English to learn better French. We should be grateful that he speaks English at all, rather than complain about the quality of it. Once again this would seem to come down to the rather common quality of being able to find fault with someone else, rather than look inwards to see what one is lacking. However unjust this situation is, it still leads to the situation where British skiers would prefer a fluent English speaking instructor, which, rightly or wrongly, is usually seeb as meaning one of the ESFs competitors.

Taking into account these three perspectives, it is no wonder that what is seen by the ESF as sensible regulation, is simultaneously seen by some independant ski schools as anti-competitive, and perceived by British skiers as something that is disadvantageous to them, however as we are talking about something that happens in France, the final say must go to the French. It is, after all, their country.

You know it makes sense.

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

A snowHead

A snowHead

Steady chaps - remember that this is a service industry that we are talking about.

It is immaterial whether it is in France or not - if the ESF wish to attract and keep English speaking customers, there is a need to provide instructors who can communicate effectively in clear English.

If the ESF do not want such customers they can do what ever they want and leave these customers to other organisations.

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

john wells, obviously. That is presumably one reason why the English couple - both qualified instructors at Meribel - that I was chatting to at a judo competition in Aime on Saturday, were poached from an independent ski school and now work for Meribel ESF.

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

Hi all

Just a little tip on how to get more value for your money in regards to ski lessons.

Now, I've only tried this with the ESF, so there is no guarantee it will work with other schools or in other countries! Also, it only works for advanced/expert skiers.

All you do is sign up for advanced/experts lessons though a tour operator. Normally you will get two hours a day with a good instructor and you'll be unlucky if you have more then three people in your group.

One year it was just me and the instructor, two hours a day, for five days and it only cost me £60!

Lubbly jubbly!

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

I don't understand where all this "they don't speak english" is coming from with regard to the ESF. Here in LDA we have an ESF of 160 permanent instructors (I believe it's the 2nd largest in France). Of these 160 about 140 speak some degree of English, about 100 speak passable English, about 60 good English and about 20 fluent english. I think that's pretty good. Of course they have an accent, but if you come from the South East like me, how well do you understand the Geordies? PG has no accent inFrench that I can discern, but I do. I try to pronounce the words correctly, but definitely fail. I would count my spoken French as fluent though.

Now I hate to be an apologist for the ESF, since I've suffered at the hands of their union, but many of the complaints are either very old hat or just repeated gossip. Having said that I would not book group lessons with any ESF anywhere in France, and would want to have a recommendation for any instructor I hired as a private.

In addition, if you were on our glacier this week you would see around 200 ESFs from all over France being refreshed and recycled. They're working hard on their technique (modern), giving us beautiful examples of how it should be done, and then being marked on their performance. The ESI refresher is one day, the BASI one is half a day. The ESF are doing a whole week! Confused

You'll need to Register first of course.

easiski, if the situation were reversed, how many English people would be speaking French I wonder?

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

Kramer, Not as many I suspect. rolling eyes

After all it is free

easiski, how well did you understand us? Very Happy

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Help!!

Ski instruction in France

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste