British ski instructors fined 10,000 Euros in French Alps

A snowHead

Jonpim, (ref requirement for published research papers for candidacy for consultancy posts).... I do see your point. Though the publishing of reseach papers can be an indication of independent and original thought, something that might be useful in the diagnosis of the rarer, less easily pinpointed conditions?....

A snowHead

PG. You're putting far too much emphasis on high-power skiing. Driving instructors aren't expected to be Formula One performers. Teachers of physics in a school aren't expected to be nuclear scientists.

A teacher of a bunch of beginners or intermediates doesn't need to be a racer. The acid test is results - I could go to the Alps right now and find you lots of excellent ski teachers (proven by the success of their pupils) who are hopeless in gates.

Racing and recreation are two fairly distinct branches of our sport, which is fine.

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

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

Some light reading from the archives.

http://specials.ft.com/timeoff/ftski/FT3D4JX5CHC.html ... rather an 'English' slant, but good points made all round.

For info.... to pass the Eurotest you have to ski a 34 gate GS course under FIS (International Ski Federation) rules. The target time is set by an accredited forerunner (with his/her own FIS rating), this points rating then being used to calculate the time down to '0' FIS points (ie the time of the GS world champ). A pass is achieved by those who manage to ski within 18% of the '0' FIS time.

Sound tough? Maybe. But what do these figures mean? Earlier in this thread I mentioned that the ESF flèche tests, open to all, work on the same principle. Except instead of the world GS champ, the time of a full member (male) of the French senior national squad is used. No distinguishing between girls and boys here, you have to get to within 17% of the forerunner's time (calculated down according to his penalty) to get your gold flèche. I've seen a quite a few 9 year olds manage this. Girls and boys. And any number of 11 year olds upwards.

By the time some of them in their mid-teens they'll be on the verge of the Eurotest qualifying standard. Ok, maybe only somewhere between 5 and 10% of all Eurotest entrants pass first attempt. But is that a reflection of the toughness of the test, or the skiing standard of the entrants? I know what I think!

The French (and Austrians, Italians) are saying that to qualify to teach (in their own countries!) you'll need to do about 4 years' training, work for a couple of hundred hours in a ski school, pass BASI 2 technical and teaching assessments and then the ISIA Ski Teacher requirements (off-piste and mountain safety, orienteering, accident procedures etc).

http://www.isiaski.org/edit_site/profile/membership_english.asp

When you've achieved this level (6 weeks of assessment courses), you have to work in a ski school for another 200 hours, followed by more tests - the teaching diploma (1 week assessment - yes this is an integral part of the qualification!) and a technical diploma.

Many turn up who think they can ski, but are just not up to standard. Think of the top skiers you see on the slopes, then compare yourself honestly. Do you look amateurish in comparison? Then you're in with little chance of getting through.. and when I go for my next lesson I at least in France know with certainty what the instructor has been through to get his job.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

I think I’m going to have to side with PG on this one and mutineer against David Goldsmith. . .

We’ve all met people who can ‘talk the talk’ but not ‘walk the walk’. Skiing is the same. I’ve started my BASI route and I can (god forbid if asked) regurgitate the appallingly mangled syntax of the BASI manual but I’ve still got many very bad habits, some are due to the natural physiological results of trauma and some are due to the thought process response to said trauma (it’s the BASI manual in me to type that tautological poop).

There are graduations in teaching skills as there are in practical skills. These should be congruent. Whilst I applaud BASI’s address of the ‘core’, they’ve taken it to the point of being anal and have handicapped many of their members because of that.

There is a counterpoint to this in that BASI is labouring to instill mind and muscle skills to its new recruits that a ‘child of the mountains’ (ie PG’s kids) considers reflex. It’s perhaps a result of BASI taking its recruits too early in their ski life and having to continually pound into them at every level, the very core of ski technique that is the root cause of the dissent.

With some exceptions, british skiers do not have enough time on the snow before becoming ‘qualified’ and as such the ‘equivalency’ is looked on as a barrier rather than just part of their natural skills development or quite simply ‘dotting the I’s and crossing the t’s’ to something they’ve been doing for years.

I find it ludicrous that this argument even exists! We might have a little more credibility in our whining if the Alps were in Sussex. Exclamation

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

PG, that's what I was trying to say a couple of pages back (well, the last bit about knowing you've got a well-qualified instructor), but you managed it a lot more eloquently.

Totally agree.

After all it is free

Just to come back to the rogue instructors. There is a major issue of insurance. The instructors would have professional liability insurance (assuming they bothered as they don't seem too worried about such things). If there is an accident and one of their clients wishes to make a claim the insurance company is entitled to deny its cover on the basis that they were operating illegally. Caveat Emptor.

davidof, thank you, that is today's REAL issue!

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

davidof.... the voice of sanity Smile

And bearing this in mind, where would that leave the resort authorities in terms of liability, for permitting the instructors to perform their teaching activities regardless??

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Having just come across this topic (which like in parts appears to have wandered off at a tangent) I thought put in a word for the two ‘Brit’ organisations in Megève. Far from being ‘rogue’ instructors running ‘cowboy’ outfits, they both operate committed and professional instructional ski holidays. I have stayed regularly with Simon Butler Skiing since my initiation to the slopes six years ago and also Barrett-Boyce. As an apprehensive latecomer to skiing at 48, I have learnt to ski safely, fast and confidently in all conditions and all colour of pistes through their superb instruction. (To compare, I have also had tuition in Andorra, Val d’Isere and Austria but nothing like the same calibre). Their businesses thrive on hundreds of skiers (many highly experienced advanced skiers still honing their skills) voting with their skiboots on every year and their chalets are booked solid with repeat business. So, if you reckon you’re skiing is perfect then Messrs Butler and Barrett-Boyce are probably not for you. Otherwise, try them out and you might learn something. And by the way, they inform me they are insured and also insist, sensibly, that guests have their own policies, too.

James and Simon’s campaign is an attempt to get worthy British and International (is France excluding herself from this category?) qualifications accepted without needing to be validated by the ‘equivalence’. Neither they nor their instructors would have problems passing the slalom test which has dominated this discussion (I’ve seen them all do gates at twice the speed of sound) and concur with earlier comments that proficiency in speed may be of lesser value than communication skills and creativity in explaining technique. Working in the NHS field myself, the entire organisation would sink without the army of doctors and nurses who qualified outside the UK and, having interviewed many clinicians, I don’t really remember making a choice based on how fast they could get through their consultations...As for comments regarding linguistic skills, I can’t vouch for James’s but I know that Simon’s French has always been appalling despite many years living there and anyway there was an interpreter in court. As for the fines, the amount was what they expected.

However, I fear (and this is said as a true Francophile and French speaker) that Megève is an expensive and chic provincial resort where the French penchant for self-protectionism is not only evident from Simon and James’s crusade: the mainstream tour operators have been deterred by the locals which is why the resort is rarely seen in the glossy brochures. The restaurateurs, ski-rental and other traders however, are delighted to see hundreds of SBS and SkiBB returning customers who do seem to bring a somewhat down-to-earth manner into an indigenous population of (not-so-faux) furs and petits chiens. As for the ESF, if you want to learn to ski with your knees glued together, there are plenty of instructors still demonstrating their preferred style. Fine for the fur-wearers but not for me.

LS

snow reports

snobrain, What an interesting post from a 'first-timer'!!

The insurance question is a moot point, whatever "you have been informed" Wink

, for the reasons very sensibly mentioned by Davidof. A specific response to whether an insurance company can or cannot rescind cover on the basis that an insured is allegedly operating illegally (personnel without the proper qualifications) is not provided by your simple assertion to the effect that the people concerned are covered. Evidence, please.

The term 'rogue' specifically applies to this aspect of the affair. How good the hols are is completely irrelevant, a straw man argument. how good the instruction appears to be to you with few skiing weeks under your belt (and how many at this particular school?) is barely relevant.

There is nothing wrong with the opinion that equivalence should be automatic, that the speed test is not important. There is everything wrong with campaigning to have the rules changed while operating from outside the law, if that is indeed the case. It is perfectly possible to wage such a campaign from inside the system. And if not, why not?

More assertions to the effect that they would be perfectly capable of passing the Eurotest.... Well, "money", "put", and "mouth" spring to mind. None of your 'arguments' justify in the slightest treating the system of your host country with disrespect, and it's no wonder that in some regions the French are becoming not a little impatient with the large number of 'Little Englanders' who appear to think that they can import their culture and system and live in isolation. Views such as this have always resulted in the British abroad gaining a bad reputation, and deservedly so.

The final 'point' about the ESF is a joke, not even worthy of comment. The allegedly inferior tuition in Val d'Isère, etc. is just another assertion on your part, with nothing provided to back up your opinions, which ring pretty hollow to me.

You know it makes sense.

I'm sorry, I could perhaps have put it differently, but the point stands. Satisfaction with the tuition based on few weeks of instruction in total does not provide justification for the opinion expressed by snobrain that the organisation is a "professional" one (in terms of legality as well as/or in comparison to the multitude of ski schools out there).

The ESF is by no means perfect but that has been pointed out by numerous contributors, not least myself. They are looking at ways to increase their appeal. In a much earlier thread I posted a published article of mine on Les Deux Alpes which specifically criticised the customer satisfaction failures of the ESF, and the comparative advantages of the British equivalents (those that operate within the law, of course). Your point is not relevant to the original topic - which was whether or not the instructors were operating legally.

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

A snowHead

The insurance issue was pointed out by our legal advisor who covered the case for PisteHors. She's a French/English qualified lawyer specializing in insurance matters and a professor at the French ENA (Ecole National d'Administration) so I take her word for it. This is obviously just a legal opinion but this would be the first point she would attack. Insurance companies are not charities and will do whatever it takes to not pay claims.

The term rogue, when applied to two people who have been found guilty in a criminal court is entirely appropriate. I would refer you to the lack of drinks license as well.

I, for one, have never questioned their abilities as skiers or instructors but how come some people think they can come over to France and just ignore whatever local laws are in place? It is complete arrogance and it is one reason why the English are badly viewed in Europe. Far from striking a blow for liberty and free trade illegal actions of this nature make life that much more difficult for ex-pats trying to run legal businesses in France. With the National Front scoring 15% in the first round of last week's regional elections this is not the time to be riding roughshod over local sensibilities.

Thanks to the work of the Basi there is now a route for British qualified ski instructors to work in France and I would also point out that the supposed campaign of the two instructors is not supported by the Basi. That in itself doesn't mean that they don't have a point and David Goldsmith, amongst others, has argued the case here, but they are still not operating within the law. I'm sure snobrain, as an NHS worker, would appreciate that you can't have unqualified nurses and doctors working, no matter how good their skills may be.

A snowHead

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

There does seem to be a blanket acceptance amongst English skiers that the ESF are poor value, operate big classes and therefore want to see the equivilance continue because it safeguards their positions. The test applies to everyone irrespective of which ski school they work for, PG has set out the curriculum that prospective instructors have to follow. From my knowledge it is more difficult to become an instructor in France than any other country certainly more difficult than the US. My son worked as a ski and snowboard instuctor in the US for 3 years, had a Level 2 grade which our local ESF would recognise but he still had to do the equivalance and work as a trainee for the requisite number of hours. This is not a problem, he was happy to do it. I will take issue over the comments regarding the standard of teaching. In our village there are three ski schools and when asked by our guests which we would recommend, we say, any of them. IMHO the ESF, in particular, have made huge efforts by hiring Brits, ensuring that instructors have a good command of English, or Danish, or Dutch and by limiting class sizes on certain lessons. Lets move on from this, the test isn't anti-English and the standard of instruction in France is as good or better than most other countries.

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

Masque....

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

I don't see why ski instructors should see it as a barrier rather than a requirement.
There are many regulated professions which require extremely high standards in skills you are not going to probably use, when you choose to do such a profession you accept this, and study (or train) to pass the test.
Whilst the profession I do (a chip design engineer) in the UK does not at the moment require such compulsory regulation (though CEng is still a useful indicator), if I move to another country, say Canada (or even France I think ?) , I would be required to meet their national standards which I would know as a consequence of working there I would have to do.

(Guess this has gone way off the original topic but it's an interesting discussion!! snowHead

)

You'll need to Register first of course.

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

As the BASI 1 PG referred to I can explain the requirements:
We now have an agreement with France, Italy and Austria, and all our exams in these 4 countries are pretty much the same and include the speed test (now a giant slalom). Therefore any recent BASI National qualified people should have automatic equivalence in these other countries.
Prior to this arrangement we had to do the parts of the French National exam which were not included in our exams. This did not only mean the speed test, but depending on your grade could involve other courses.

I was one of those who received the equivalence without taking the speed test. We had to be National Ski Teachers with at least 4 years experience at that level, and be over 40 at the time. The French, quite reasonably considered that to race at more or less national level at this sort of age was impossible/unrealistic. This was a concession that was granted for a limited period of time some years ago, to allow experienced and highly qualified British Instructors to work in France. We all have to have "Carte Professionelle" and we have to carry these with us on the mountain. It was NOT an underhanded deal for "the boys", but a reasonable concession to age and experience. Personally I had been teaching for 20 years before applying for my equivalence.
While I agree that you do not have to be a fantastic skier to be a good teacher, you should at least be able to demonstrate at all levels, and don't forget you need to be able top ski looking backwards at all levels too!! France has very high standards and has helped to raise the level of British standards by it's strictness. It has also helped to raise the awareness of the ski-ing public to the qualifications required to do our job. It's a few years now since I heard people referring to me as a "ski-bum" - thank God.
It should be remembered also, that ski teachers are responsible for their clients lives in a hostile environment. There have been a lot of nasty accidents with the Tour Operator "guides" over the years, just because they are not qualified.
I cannot comment on the case in question, but if they were working without equivalence (and without speaking the language of the country in which they worked) then they were breaking the law - enough said.

After all it is free

I would like to know the following from the professional knockers of Messrs Butler and Boyce on this site:

- to what do they attribute the long running commercial success of those gentlemen?

- what level of commercial success have they achieved themselves?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

There is only one way to deal with people like that

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

laundryman, In France there are a considerable number of Brits who operate "successful" businesses from outside the law. From builders to graphic designers and IT workers - many fields are involved. A major factor contributing to the ability of some to stay in business is the evasion of tax, NI, professional dues, all of which are particularly high in France. Some employ people on 'short-term contracts' from the UK. Some register their businesses in the UK in order to pay tax there, despite their trade being entirely French-based. There are any number of fiddles.

The majority of Brits who live in France see themselves as guests in this country. Incidents such as the one in question reinforce the negative stereotyping of the arrogant Brit abroad, who believes that he can flout locals laws and customs with impunity. Those of us who abide by the rules all suffer as a result.

Operating without a drinks licence, not abiding by the rules of a regulated profession, assuming the facts have been reported accurately, I feel strongly to be inexcusable. The repercussions for the remainder of the British community in France are considerable each time a case such as this makes the headlines.

For your information laundryman, while I am a qualified and French-registered self-employed translator and interpreter, I am also a freight forwarder, a business which I started from scratch in the UK fifteen years ago. In France freight forwarding is a regulated field, unlike back home. It is doing well, thank you very much, and is the principle reason why I am able to spend rather too much time contributing to snowHeads, working from home in the Tarentaise valley, and going skiing whenever I feel like it....

The issue here has never been whether said Megève-based company could keep the punters happy and give them apparently satisfactory instruction.

pistemeister, you were referring to whom? Wink

DavidS, Perhaps the poster in question has had experience of the services in question. Excuse my slight scepticism, but I would only take information at face value, sketchy as it was, with a few more facts than were provided. I beg to differ on whether such a contribution is "equally important" as the knowledge that said company has been found guilty in a court of law of operating illegally, with direct consequences for the remainder of the British community that operate within the law and pay their dues in full.

It is easy for all back at home to take a superficial look at cases such as these and see them as another form of Brit-bashing by Johny Frenchman. There are enough Mail/Sun style campaigns which play on a people's natural defensiveness and sense of social group solidarity to make money. It sometimes seems frighteningly easy for the media to press the right buttons in order to generate a required response. The original post hinted at protectionism, with the French "preventing foreigners from working unless they held French qualifications". Well as a Brit working for many years in a regulated profession in France, and with many British friends in a similar position, I can assure you on behalf of those working within the law in France that this viewpoint is unjustified in the vast majority of cases.

snow reports

PG,

PG

I have a freight forwarding company too, do you do much business with the UK?

If you are not hooked up with anyone over here it may be worth having a chat.

Stephen.

A lot of our business is between the UK and France, but we already have our own offices and depot in Staffs. I'll mail you privately....

You know it makes sense.

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

laundryman, There is no such insinuation, as I am sure you are aware. I suggest you read my comments more carefully. I have listed just a few of the broad range of methods used by some expats to avoid, and in some cases to evade taxation. They are a matter of fact, and I thought they might be of general interest to others less aware of what is possible in this respect.

With regard to the specifics of this particular affair, I made it clear that I was only referring to the areas in which the business in question had apparently been found guilty in a French court of law, with the proviso that the reporting of the proceedings was accurate.

Both scenarios, deliberate evasion of tax/NI etc and/or flouting of French regulations have the same effect of angering the French authorities and reinforcing negative steroetypes of the British abroad. As someone who does neither I feel justified in having my say, as this affects me directly as a long-term resident in France.

My identity is transparent on this forum - see my sig. Perhaps those concerned might wish to put their position across on this forum by posting in their own names?

A snowHead

A snowHead

Some background information on the system in France.

A self-employed person charging fees for his services on a standard basis in France makes income-related statutory contributions to CNAVPL (pension fund), URSSAF (social security), CANAM (health insurance). In some self-employed fields these social charges alone can comprise 40% of your total revenue - and that's before income tax! On top of this there is personal liability insurance, membership of national associations....

My first point is that France benefits from public services of a high standard because the vast majority of the working population is happy to contribute a sizeable percentage of their income to fund an equitable system for all. (Davidof mentioned earlier just how large a percentage of your TGV train ticket is subsidised, as an example).

Secondly, a self-employed individual* can find his ability to charge competitive fees severely handicapped by those who either trade 'legally' and manage to circumvent certain social charges via the existence of loopholes, or who simply ignore the rules completely and pay nothing. The resentment of those who abide by the spirit as well as the letter of the law is growing, and it does not target foreign workers in France alone - many French who have worked on the 'black' have been denounced by their neighbours. As someone who contributes fully to the system, I completely understand the standpoint of those whose livelihoods are in some cases threatened by illegal cowboy trading or those who use the 'greyer' areas of legislation, relying on the existence of so-called loopholes.

* (Some 95% of ski instructors in France are self-employed)

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

The discussion seems to have wandered off into issues of taxation, etc, that are far wider than ski instruction. The salient point is that there is no suggestion that the businesses in question have acted illegally with regard to tax.

That a court has determined that they contravened French law with regard to qualifications is clear. However, I seem to remember a European case that might cast doubt on the validity of the French law (it wouldn't be the first time); doubtless others will have more information.

As to the merit of the French law, I can see none. No-one here has suggested that a BASI 1 instructor is not capable of imparting skills to a wide range of recreational skiers; I see no reason why they should be prevented from plying their trade, nor why persons such as 'snobrain' should not select an instructor based on criteria of their own choosing.

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

Nonetheless, the ramifications of tax avoidance methods may be of interest to some. I note that free tuition was offered by "qualified instructors", according to the website.

On the Simon Butler website he signs his intro as Simon Butler, "Grade 1 ISIA". The full conditions for ISIA membership can be seen at:

http://www.isiaski.org/edit_site/profile/membership_english.asp

Those conditions include passing the Eurotest, etc. BASI and the French are members of the organisation, agreement was reached on the adoption of a common standard nearly four years ago now, May 11th 2000. A BASI 1 instructor with equivalence can work in France. Clearly the equivalence wasn't obtained, otherwise the Court wouldn't have made a judgement against the people concerned. The standards have been agreed and adopted by all the ISIA member countries and are not being imposed by France alone.

ISIA article 6 (Transitory Regulations) states:

"In accordance with article 18 of the ISIA statutes, any member not in possession of the minimum standard at the time of activation of these regulations will have a time period of two years to conform. If the conformity has not been achieved within this time period the member will lose its membership".

It would seem pretty clear therefore that the status claimed on the website, according to the court decision, is inaccurate.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

I realise I may be wandering off-topic somewhat, but I must object to PG's assertion that exploiting tax loopholes etc. is morally wrong. Anything that is illegal, I can totally agree is out of order, but simply using your nous to avoid (rather than evade) tax is something we all do to some extent.

Cash ISAs were originally introduced to encourage saving by those who would not normally save (focusing on lower-paid segments of the population). How many of us therefore would refuse to take out an ISA because we not the targeted segment that the government had in mind?

How many people with business opt to pay themselves dividends rather than salary in order to avoid (legally) paying NI? It's standard practice, and I think if you don't take advantage of it, you're being a bit daft.

Similarly, if you want to avoid paying the high French taxes, I don't see a problem registering your company in the UK and paying UK taxes etc. Of course, you cannot then complain if the local community ostricise (sp?) you - that's part and parcel of using the loophole.

There is no such thing as grey areas of legislations - it's either black or white. You can do it, or you can't. If you can, why not?

You'll need to Register first of course.

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

masopa, I don't think I actually said that (ref. morality). I implied it certainly, and I would be happy to expand on the reasoning - but not here, in a more appropriate forum! I don't really want to go down the road of NI v. tax on dividends. I just don't see the parallel. The loopholes I was referring to are mostly only available to expats (for reasons of language, contacts, residence split between two countries, etc), and not to the French themselves. That's part of the reason why there is resentment.

On your final point, I know of a self-employed hairdresser who tried to declare her income for taxation purposes in the UK. This was illegal as all her business was carried out in France, where she was based all year round. The law states that the majority of the business has to originate in the UK, if not this is where avoidance becomes evasion. Fortunately the tax authorities are clamping down on this, but it is extremely difficult to prove in some cases.

This is the sort of thing commercial lawyers thrive on. If there were no such thing as grey areas of legislation, especially in the taxation field, a lot of them (and a fair few tax accountants) would be out of a job! We all know of the expression a 'legal opinion'... wonder why they call it that!

After all it is free

PG, laundryman, masopa, David Goldhill and everyone else who had posted here, this thread has turned into one of the most interesting on this site (maybe any site).

And I must confess to a change in stance. David Goldsmith kicked off by suggesting the equivalence (slalom) test was restrictive (and anti-British?) by being too demanding. As we Brits now seem to be whipping the continentals at Slalom the suggestion of “anti-British” is no longer correct. PG tells us that the test is not that difficult anyway. Is the test appropriate?
I have been thinking again about qualifications and entry tests for training programs. To get into medical school you need at least 3 A grade A levels. Why should 3 As make you any better a doctor that 3 Bs? A major part of good medicine is good communication, but this is never assessed. All the same, we are reassured by our doctors coming from the cream of school leavers. So, the entry criteria are OK. Ditto the slalom test (sorry DG)
What about the Brits qualifications? Isn’t the BASI they got good enough? No, the French regulations are clear and we should respect that. This is causing a similar rumpus in medicine with lots of doctors from over-supplied Europe wanting to practice in under-supplied Britain. They insist their training is “equivalent”. The government is keen to let them in to shore up the severely under-staffed NHS. But what sort of doctor do you want? The European training takes 5 years. Ours takes 7 to 10 years. Equivalent?
I found the International Ski Instructors Association syllabus published by PG most reassuring.
Laundryman is gallantly defending his friends, but they did break the law.
So I’m with PG on this
(PS: snobrain suggested French tuition results in knees being glued together. Not true. That’s the Austrian Affliction, which I have real bad . My French instructors spend all their time trying to unglue them.)

Get your facts right!

I am Simon Butler, a BASI Grade 1 (held since 1985), and am one of the instructors involved with the court case in Bonneville. My company, Simon Butler Skiing, has been based in Megeve, France providing package skiing holidays with free instruction, for the past 21 years. The ESF has taken me to court for two reasons: Firstly they believe we are taking clients who would otherwise have chosen to take ski tuition with them, which is simply not true. Our clients return year after year because of the quality of professional tuition we can offer which is reflected in our 92 per cent return rate this season. In fact all of the guests holidaying with us during the week of the court case alone signed a petition to state they visit Megeve to ski with us, and wouldn’t consider taking ski tuition with the ESF.

The second reason is because of the Equivalence speed test. The Euro, or Speed Test, was brought in two years ago by the French to assess an instructor’s ability. I agree that they have the right to insist that foreign instructors also take this test. BASI (British Association of Snowsports Instructors) followed this move and incorporated the Speed Test into the Grade 1 exam. All French and British instructors who passed their exams prior to the Speed Test were exempted from taking it, and awarded the Test. It is because I employ BASI Grade 3 and 2 level instructors that I have not been granted the Speed Test. The ESF is able to employ unqualified instructors as Stagiers (trainees). They are able to work and train for up to four years before they have to pass the Speed Test and attain their French Diploma. This law is good as it enables a trainee instructor to work and pay for the training required to attain the level needed to pass the Speed Test while developing their teaching methods and working with real clients. I am simply asking to be able to operate under the same legislation as the French. At this time there is no law which enables our instructors to work under the same rules as our French counterparts so we knew prior to the court hearing what the result would be! In fact our lawyer had already prepared our appeal which went in the next day! We are now continuing to work under appeal and will be taking the case forward, if necessary to European Court in Brussels.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Having started this thread, which is now longer than the Vallee Blanche, I appreciate you calling in with the 'defendant's viewpoint'. The more reporters we have from the slopes the better.

When I worked on Cairngorm in 1974-6, there were about 7 or 8 ski schools operating on the mountain, based on British, Austrian, Norwegian and Swiss teaching methods, with Canadians, Americans, Australasians, Swedes, Romanians, Austrians, Norwegians, English, Scots, French all teaching on the mountain in perfect harmony.

Please explain that to the Judge!

Help!!

British ski instructors fined 10,000 Euros in French Alps

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste