 Poster: A snowHead
|
EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest Tax Depreciation and Amortization) is a crap measure and usually only used by start ups who try to make the case that they would be making money if only they didn't live in the real world.
Interest - You borrowed money - Of course you have to pay the interest.
Taxes - Guess what. You've got to pay these too.
Depreciation - Yup. Those ski lifts are going to need replacing sometime and are worth less every year. Better put some money aside for that and realise that it isn't free.
Amortization - Like depreciation but mainly for intangible assets. Recognises that using a brand, patent, copyright etc isn't free and should be accounted for.
I'm all for people earning a decent wage but the only way you can do that is if they need you more than you need them. The problem is that they have a monopoly (which they paid lots of money for) so they have the jobs and there are plenty of people willing to take it at the wages they're offering. As others have said, there will always be plenty of young people with no commitments willing to take the jobs for the lifestyle so I don't know quite how you're going to change it. The whole thing is set up wrong for you, but to be brutally honest that's the way it is and I'm not sure there's much you can do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Introduce the Eurotest 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Introduce a market
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
 you may have just got my vote
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@TTT, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@Fairwages, what you need is a Union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introducing a more open market would be a start and a eurotest equivalent could keep the wannabees out and the numbers down.
The trouble is that the operating companies have paid a fortune for the sole rights to the ski area and as has been pointed out the ski lessons make a good contribution towards the costs / profits (the same thing) so the whole structure of the current set up is all wrong for the ski instructors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Fairwages , in which case things have definitely gone downhill..! (Mind you, my memory is slightly hazy of those winters so my figures are approximate at best!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
In my experience there are three critical stages as an instructor
18-25 years of age
Typically raw and inexperienced. Pay rate is comensurate with experience.
The ones that get that taking certs and working on the teaching and customer service side of things start earning some nice money.
At that age money is to be spent and enjoyed and there's a greater tolerance for shared housing etc.
At some stage most leave the profession to join 'the real world'.
45 years of age and older
May or may not have taught previously (see above).
Passionate skiers.
Made some great money in their chosen profession but hate it.
Decide to make a career change.
Get certed or renew certification.
Move to one of the towns they previously vacationed at and start on lowest pay grade.
Surprised that their instructor pay doesn't go as far as their corporate holiday money and get disgruntled.
25-45 years of age
Never left. Lifers. Fully certed. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
Came to the profession at this age because they couldn't afford to take as many holidays as their wage and time off would allow. Tried to get as well certified as they want / need / can manage.
Understand the struggle most people make to afford skiing. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
I'm in the last group. Started skiing at 27. Got first certification at 36. Been at it ever since (with a small break from teaching for family reasons). |
You missed the 25-45 segment with a side gig. I've met any number of US and Canadian instructors with a real estate licence so they can pimp to their private lesson clientele. There's dome natural synergy there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
In my experience there are three critical stages as an instructor
18-25 years of age
Typically raw and inexperienced. Pay rate is comensurate with experience.
The ones that get that taking certs and working on the teaching and customer service side of things start earning some nice money.
At that age money is to be spent and enjoyed and there's a greater tolerance for shared housing etc.
At some stage most leave the profession to join 'the real world'.
45 years of age and older
May or may not have taught previously (see above).
Passionate skiers.
Made some great money in their chosen profession but hate it.
Decide to make a career change.
Get certed or renew certification.
Move to one of the towns they previously vacationed at and start on lowest pay grade.
Surprised that their instructor pay doesn't go as far as their corporate holiday money and get disgruntled.
25-45 years of age
Never left. Lifers. Fully certed. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
Came to the profession at this age because they couldn't afford to take as many holidays as their wage and time off would allow. Tried to get as well certified as they want / need / can manage.
Understand the struggle most people make to afford skiing. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
I'm in the last group. Started skiing at 27. Got first certification at 36. Been at it ever since (with a small break from teaching for family reasons). |
You missed the 25-45 segment with a side gig. I've met any number of US and Canadian instructors with a real estate licence so they can pimp to their private lesson clientele. There's dome natural synergy there.
To the OP the only real answer is to unionise or otherwise organise. I don't think it'll be successful as the younger and older tiers have a vested interest in the status quo. After all the biggest barrier to entry in the US that stops us all doing it ( no artificial barriers like Euro test) and living the dream is the sucky pay. If you could have a decent home and family easily on ski instructor wages there would be more instructors than punters on the slopes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Fairwages wrote: |
| Some Ski Schools publicly post how they pay their Instructors, while others are more circumspect. Does anyone have information on how ski schools pay their instructors? |
Come on  instructors; show some solidarity and give the guy some pay data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@olderscot, If EBITDA is such a crap measure, why does the Vail Resorts CEO mention it so often? If their earnings figure is so accurate, then why does the stock trade for over 100 x stated Earnings?
How much did Vail Resorts pay for their monopoly rights? I'll give you a hint, their "Non-Exclusive" SUP requires them to pay a % of revenue each year with nothing significant up front which is far less than what they paid for the Canyons.
Vail's Ski Area Term Special Use Permit say:
Terms & Conditions
Part I, Section E. Nonexclusive Use. This permit is not exclusive. The Forest Service reserves the right to use or permit others to use any part of the permitted area for any purpose...
From the Vail Resorts 10-K:
p.17 The 1986 Ski Area Permit Act (the “1986 Act”) allows the USDA Forest Service (the “Forest Service”) to
grant Term Special Use Permits (each, a “SUP”) for the operation of ski areas and construction of related facilities on
National Forest lands...Under the 1986 Act, the Forest Service has the right to review and approve the location, design and
construction of improvements in the permit area and many operational matters. Virtually all of the skiable terrain at
Vail Mountain, Breckenridge, Heavenly, Keystone, and Kirkwood is located on Forest Service land.
p.18 For use of the SUPs, we pay a fee to the Forest Service ranging from 1.5% to 4.0% of sales for services
occurring on Forest Service land. Included in the calculation are sales from, among other things, lift tickets, season
passes, ski school lessons, food and beverages, equipment rentals and retail merchandise.
The SUPs may be amended by us or by the Forest Service to change the permit area or permitted uses. The
Forest Service may amend a SUP, if it determines that such amendment is in the public interest. While the Forest
Service is required to seek the permit holder’s consent to any amendment, an amendment can be finalized over a permit
holder’s objection.
p.6 There is limited opportunity for development of new ski areas due to the limited private lands on which ski
areas can be built, the difficulty in obtaining the appropriate governmental approvals to build on public lands and the
significant capital needed to construct the necessary infrastructure. As such, there have been virtually no new major
resorts in North America for more than 30 years, which has and should continue to allow the best positioned resorts,
including all of our resorts, to capture a majority of future industry growth.
p. 17 We consider employee relations to be good.
From the Vail Resorts Proxy/10-K:
p.44- Annual funding of the MIP is based upon our achievement of
performance measures selected by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee has
established (1) Resort EBITDA, and (2) performance goals for Vail Resorts Development Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They care about earnings because analysts and the market care. Organise an instructor walkout at VR properties and they'll care far more about spinning the PR that it has no knock on effect on other revenues than they will about paying you more to tempt you back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Famous saying "You need to be poor to ski and rich to teach" although I might have that the wrong way around 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
@olderscot, If EBITDA is such a crap measure, why does the Vail Resorts CEO mention it so often?
|
That's an easy one. Using EBITDA makes your numbers look so much better and it's the headline numbers that people remember and the media report on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Wow a financial discussion, in a ski forum, don't know if I should be ecstatic or appalled. Ebitda gets to the cash an operation can make. It's a good equalizer if you want to compare the earnings power of somehat different companies that have similar capital needs. But it's not the be all and end all, as there are capital need, massive capital needs for that matter. Can one put up a new gondola without capital?, no. They need to borrow debt, so interest charges are important. Does that lift have an extinction date, yes, so depreciation is important. Do you have to pay taxes, of course, so taxes have to be viewed. Investors care about ebitda margins for comparative purposes, but also net for eps purposes.
There are massive amounts of valuation measures, some look good for mtn, some don't. They pick the ones that make them look great, so valuation goes up. EV, cash multiples, DCOH, edit margin, Roa, roc, dcf, p/e, p/e/g, etc. but bottom line, I think running a ski biz is one of the hardest businesses out there, that's why they are oligopolies now, and likely why wages are somewhat standardized as the market has given them pricing power. Remember, all these resorts were gonna close a while ago. So the prospect of sh!tty resorts with no capital or big resorts with modern facilities, good and safe infrastructure is acceptable to many vacationers vs the other option.
Your point about wages is fair,((sorry could not resist) but we are all at will employees (unless we are the bosses I guess) with free will to choose careers. I not overly happy with my job/career these days, but it lets me go to vail (next week!) so I endure. Good luck in your quest. Unfortunately you are not alone in your wage complaints these days, it's the biggest issue for our economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Just went back through my records. Last time I worked for someone.
Niseko Base Snowsports, Hokkaido, Japan 2007/08
Base rate - JPY 2,000 / hr
Request private - JPY 3,200 / hr
At the time the cost for an all day private lesson was JPY 48 - 60,000 depending on numbers.
This was my second season and I did mostly request privates with guests from the previous winter.
Maybe Jimmer can give more up to date info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@Redwine, @olderscot, Thanks for the posts...I agree with much of what you are saying, but it is interesting that there seems to be very little push back when the Compensation Committee and CEO focus on numbers that justify his bonus (total comp of over $5 M this year), but it seems ok that the instructors get paid so little of their teaching revenue with the Ski School reporting a 54.6% profit margin. There are lots of Instructors who have been with Vail longer than the CEO.
@Mike Pow, Thanks for the data and thanks to @ALQ, for trying to get back to the initial goal of the thread.
| ALQ wrote: |
| Fairwages wrote: |
| Some Ski Schools publicly post how they pay their Instructors, while others are more circumspect. Does anyone have information on how ski schools pay their instructors? |
Come on instructors; show some solidarity and give the guy some pay data. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@Fairwages, I'm sure you'll receive more data from instructors via Private Message - I think it's a busy period for them just now.
It's good to see folks helping the youngsters and others lower down the ladder (not just instructors). We could do more of that attitude in the UK.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
This post made me think of a great place I visited a while ago, Taos ski valley, where taking a weekly lesson was almost a requirement of the stay there. What an awesome mountain, skiers only, lots of hiking required to find the really good stuff, and Taos/Santa Fe/New Mexico is magical. Well didn't rraluze this: http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_24703212/blakes-sell-taos-ski-area-billionaire-conservationist-louis
So it's tells the dilemma a bit. Super fabulous ski resort, on par with anyplace I ski in the Rockies, but can't make it without becoming a mega resort that is going to be driven by real estate and attracting private planes. Not sure if this supports or is against your point, but I bet a lot of ski personnel were worried about getting paid anything for a few years at Taos, the flip side of being at a big conglomerate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I'm not an instructor but I do remember a recent discussion with an instructor where I asked him how much of the fee he was getting and he told me he was getting 50 euros an hour. This was a request private lesson and sounds outside of the other examples given here so should be taken with caution but it does give you another data point.
And this was with a largish ski school. Not an independent instructor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From 2012/13
Starting pay/hour:
Unqualified - $10
PSIA 1 - $12
PSIA 2 - $14
PSIA 3 - $16
Group incentive/hour - $3 for over 6 students.
Request Private incentive/hour - $5 up to 25 hours then + $1/hr for each additional 25hrs up to a max of +$13
Accreditation incentive/hour (Senior/Children's/Freestyle) - $0.5
Merit pay/hour - varies depending on length of service and relative worth, ie how much you made for the resort the previous year.
Check-in pay was at minimum wage ($8/hr) and was always at least 1/2hr a day.
Show-up pay was equal to Teaching Pay.
So in my case, my base wage was $17.50 - PSIA 2 with 3 Accreditations, and $2/hr merit pay. Most of my lessons were request privates and by the beginning of January I had over 100 request hours, by the end of the season I had over 250 (it was a bad season).
Cost of a full day private lesson (6.5hrs) was $599.
This is a largeish ski school in a well known US resort that doesn't have a strong lesson taking tradition except for kids.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Thanks @skinanny!
Bases for certified instructors are $1.05/hr more than Vail is currently and the incentives seem better also while the all day private lesson price is over $250 less than Vail (which ranges from $850 to $915).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've recently received a revised contract, because from what I understand, Canadian immigration have introduced a minimum wage.
Mine is not minimum, but it was detailed that someone starting out would be on $15/hr.
I know I'm very fortunate where I work, as we get a minimum guaranteed 26 hrs a week, paid, regardless of whether we actually work those hours.
More often than not it's 8hr days...for 5 days a week.
We also get two days off a week...which is unheard of...so we all go skiing to different resorts with reciprocal ( free ) ski passes.
We are encouraged to develop and promote private lessons...which pay nearly triple.
I have found a niche in providing video lessons, which I email to my clients as they can keep a record of there progress.
The Resort finds accommodation for us. I share a 2 bedroom flat with lounge, diner, kitchen, bathroom, storage, balcony, fire pit and bbq, and wash and dry room. It sits on the edge of a lake and is surrounded by forest.
I pay $240 a month all in for that.
We also get picked up and taken to resort everyday.
I don't need the transport as we have been able to save for a car and leave it over there.
We also pay $50 a year for access to the local community centre.
It has a fully equipped gym, free wifi, Pool tables, Table Tennis tables, Fully stocked kitchen with honesty box, Bar, and the biggest and complete TV and sound system with all knobs on.
We also have a free community Ice Rink and free to use Hockey equipment.
I know I'm very lucky where I work...and it's not the norm.
Unfortunately I'm still waiting on my visa approval...it seems most of Canada are having the same problem.
Should...fingers crossed, be leaving in the next week... I hope so, as I have lessons booked in next weekend
The Canadian Government have really screwed up this year...local 'task forces' have been put in place to help shift the backlog of visa applications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Thanks @spud, sounds like you have a really good situation North of the border. Best of luck getting your Visa.
At Vail, our assigned private lessons pay us the same as groups, but pay us an extra $6/hr when a guest specifically requests us or books directly through us. Cost of living is MUCH HIGHER in Vail than what you describe. The work is pretty steady here, but we are typically only paid 6.5 or 7 hours when we work all day (even though I am typically at the resort 8.5+ hours if you count time getting to and from the parking lot and changing into uniform).
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Fairwages wrote: |
Thanks @spud, sounds like you have a really good situation North of the border. Best of luck getting your Visa.
At Vail, our assigned private lessons pay us the same as groups, but pay us an extra $6/hr when a guest specifically requests us or books directly through us. Cost of living is MUCH HIGHER in Vail than what you describe. The work is pretty steady here, but we are typically only paid 6.5 or 7 hours when we work all day (even though I am typically at the resort 8.5+ hours if you count time getting to and from the parking lot and changing into uniform). |
We get paid from 8.30 to 5.00 with a 1/2 hour unpaid for lunch.
So paid 8 hr days.
We arrive in the mornings at 8.15...change into uniform, then have morning meeting at 8.30.
We then all help to set up the kids area and bunny hill.
Lessons start at 9.30 finishes at 4.30. I am assigned supervising duties for an hour, just to make sure lessons are assigned properly and it runs smoothly.
We all do tear down, and have a job assigned for half hour helping out in the boot room etc.
We also get paid for anytime doing personal development training.
So if it's a quiet weekend, our boss makes sure someone is improving our skiing and teaching, instead of just pishing about.
I would say I mainly teach school kids during the weekdays and a mix of Adults and Race Club and Ski Camps during the weekend. Mondays and Tuesdays off.
It's not all roses in Canada though...and can be expensive depending on resort. A friend of mine has just worked 30hrs in 48hrs...two jobs...Instructing and bar work...just to get by.
The only downside to where I work is that we don't get anything off the booze in the bar.
Fortunately, we leave by 6pm and are in the local, which serves us 'locals' prices by 6.15pm
Regarding the visas... I noticed the States made this mistake a few years ago, and are now starting to see the error of there ways. I've noticed a lot more visas available in the States this season. I almost went for a couple in Montana and Vermont.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of people asked about tips. If you don't include those and all the other benefits in your rates you're being disingenuous.
Personally I think it's a reasonably fair business. Several excellent instructors I know drive cars like mine and have the sort of watches I'd never wear (the jobbies you see advertised in airline magazines). Sure, most don't make it that far, but it's not a business you should be in if money's your main goal.
I'm all for openness though. On the other hand you need the context and some understanding of local costs before you can make sensible comparisons across cultures. The rates for other resort work are likely to be less than stellar too: people want to be in resorts. But then there's the staff housing, and you not paying tourist prices for anything...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@spud, where in Montana has visas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
In my experience there are three critical stages as an instructor
18-25 years of age
Typically raw and inexperienced. Pay rate is comensurate with experience.
The ones that get that taking certs and working on the teaching and customer service side of things start earning some nice money.
At that age money is to be spent and enjoyed and there's a greater tolerance for shared housing etc.
At some stage most leave the profession to join 'the real world'.
45 years of age and older
May or may not have taught previously (see above).
Passionate skiers.
Made some great money in their chosen profession but hate it.
Decide to make a career change.
Get certed or renew certification.
Move to one of the towns they previously vacationed at and start on lowest pay grade.
Surprised that their instructor pay doesn't go as far as their corporate holiday money and get disgruntled.
25-45 years of age
Never left. Lifers. Fully certed. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
Came to the profession at this age because they couldn't afford to take as many holidays as their wage and time off would allow. Tried to get as well certified as they want / need / can manage.
Understand the struggle most people make to afford skiing. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
I'm in the last group. Started skiing at 27. Got first certification at 36. Been at it ever since (with a small break from teaching for family reasons). |
I would suggest this is all about the differences between an employee & an employer.
We all have choices in life, the easy option, choose to become an employee & your employer will find your clients, arrange all the boring stuff ie: taxes & insurances all you have to do is to get your a%% out of bed & to the slope...easy peasy. Together with all the benefits as before outlined.
If you wish to increase your earning power, maybe the option would be to become an employee, listen, learn & make contacts & then take a leap of faith & set yourself up as an independent. Now the fun begins, for those of you who have never stepped off the ledge, well here it is!
Put your hand in your pocket, set up your PI/EL Insurance advertise & coerce potential customers to part with their Euros & you will reap the rewards, IMO the ROI is jusT reward.
If you don't like the wages, not prepared to invest in yourself, well what do you want?
Perhaps you should buy a lottery ticket, good luck & enjoy the snow
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| michaelbury17 wrote: |
| Mike Pow wrote: |
In my experience there are three critical stages as an instructor
18-25 years of age
Typically raw and inexperienced. Pay rate is comensurate with experience.
The ones that get that taking certs and working on the teaching and customer service side of things start earning some nice money.
At that age money is to be spent and enjoyed and there's a greater tolerance for shared housing etc.
At some stage most leave the profession to join 'the real world'.
45 years of age and older
May or may not have taught previously (see above).
Passionate skiers.
Made some great money in their chosen profession but hate it.
Decide to make a career change.
Get certed or renew certification.
Move to one of the towns they previously vacationed at and start on lowest pay grade.
Surprised that their instructor pay doesn't go as far as their corporate holiday money and get disgruntled.
25-45 years of age
Never left. Lifers. Fully certed. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
Came to the profession at this age because they couldn't afford to take as many holidays as their wage and time off would allow. Tried to get as well certified as they want / need / can manage.
Understand the struggle most people make to afford skiing. Got a healthy customer base. Making good money. Living the dream.
-----
I'm in the last group. Started skiing at 27. Got first certification at 36. Been at it ever since (with a small break from teaching for family reasons). |
I would suggest this is all about the differences between an employee & an employer.
We all have choices in life, the easy option, choose to become an employee & your employer will find your clients, arrange all the boring stuff ie: taxes & insurances all you have to do is to get your a%% out of bed & to the slope...easy peasy. Together with all the benefits as before outlined.
If you wish to increase your earning power, maybe the option would be to become an employee, listen, learn & make contacts & then take a leap of faith & set yourself up as an independent. Now the fun begins, for those of you who have never stepped off the ledge, well here it is!
Put your hand in your pocket, set up your PI/EL Insurance advertise & coerce potential customers to part with their Euros & you will reap the rewards, IMO the ROI is jusT reward.
If you don't like the wages, not prepared to invest in yourself, well what do you want?
Perhaps you should buy a lottery ticket, good luck & enjoy the snow |
That's the crux of FairWages argument.
I'm able to and have set myself up as an independent on Hokkaido.
The only option for FairWages to instruct at or near Vail is to work for Vail Resorts as an employee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
The only option for FairWages to instruct at or near Vail is to work for Vail Resorts as an employee. |
He doesn't HAVE to work at/near Vail. There are one or two other resorts in North America. I've even heard of people who live in Wales travelling as far as Japan to find teaching work.
I can't say I have huge sympathy for FairWages argument for several reasons:
If you don't like Vail then go somewhere else
As a ski instructor you're basiocally self-employed - go and work somewhere else.
The economics of the resort are irrelevant and really none of your business. If they want to charge $950 a day or $250 a day for private lessons that's up to them. Should a factory worker building Ferraris get paid 10 times as much as someone building Fords? Maybe you think it's about profitability, in which case I presume you'd be happy to work for free at resorts that struggle top break even? The point is you get paid for the work you do.
Vail are basically paying the market rate. By and large they seem to be able to get enough instructors at the rates they pay. When they can't, then they will need to increase salaries or offer incentives - as they just have. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| foxtrotzulu wrote: |
| Quote: |
The only option for FairWages to instruct at or near Vail is to work for Vail Resorts as an employee. |
He doesn't HAVE to work at/near Vail. There are one or two other resorts in North America. I've even heard of people who live in Wales travelling as far as Japan to find teaching work.
|
Ha ha.
He doesn't have to, but he would like to it seems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| foxtrotzulu wrote: |
He doesn't HAVE to work at/near Vail. There are one or two other resorts in North America.
I can't say I have huge sympathy for FairWages argument for several reasons:
If you don't like Vail then go somewhere else
As a ski instructor you're basiocally self-employed - go and work somewhere else.
|
What if you are born and raised in the Vail Valley and really like Vail mountain, the biggest and most popular ski destination in the USA. Given that you are "basically self employed" why shouldn't you be able to go out, get insurance, an SUP from the Forest Service and advertise for clients? Seems kinda crazy that you have to move to a different country (which may or may not offer you a Visa) to be able to run your own business.
Imagine if the UK gov said that to insure better quality in the legal profession, it was going to require and issue a single law firm in each area a permit to offer legal services and hire lawyers/solicitors with it being against the law for others to offer legal services if they are not employed by the firm permitted in that area. Do you think all those currently working in London would be ok with the option of either working for the London legal monopoly or moving somewhere else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Fairwages, what you're asking for is more akin to the right to set up your own restaurant at Disneyland. Your argument should be with the Forest service, not Vail. VR have paid for the exclusive rights. Can you offer the Forest Service a better deal? Should the public purse suffer because you'd like to work closer to home and earn more too?
The fact that you were born and raised in Vail is, I'm afraid, not terribly relevant. As I understand it, there are jobs at Vail that others are prepared to take. Everyone else seems happy to travel elsewhere to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| foxtrotzulu wrote: |
@Fairwages, what you're asking for is more akin to the right to set up your own restaurant at Disneyland. Your argument should be with the Forest service, not Vail. VR have paid for the exclusive rights. Can you offer the Forest Service a better deal? Should the public purse suffer because you'd like to work closer to home and earn more too?
The fact that you were born and raised in Vail is, I'm afraid, not terribly relevant. As I understand it, there are jobs at Vail that others are prepared to take. Everyone else seems happy to travel elsewhere to work. |
I agree that the problem is more likely to be solved by a change in Forest Service policy than hoping Vail does the right thing without putting outside pressure on them.
How exactly has VR paid for exclusive rights? Their SUP says "Nonexclusive..." and they pay the Forest service much less than they pay Talisker corp for their (presumably exclusive) Canyons/PC lease.
Yes, I would be willing to offer the Forest Service a higher revenue split for ski school than the 1.5 to 4% of revenue VR currently pays- no need for the public purse to suffer. FWIW, if the goal of the Forest Service is to maximize revenue, they could charge VR (or another operator) a higher fee on premium areas like Vail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
How exactly has VR paid for exclusive rights? Their SUP says "Nonexclusive..."
|
We've discussed this before on the 'monopolies' thread. It's only non exclusive for activities that don't interfere with the rights granted under the special use permit.
"E. Nonexclusive Use. This permit is not exclusive. The Forest Service reserves the right to use or permit others to use any part
of the permitted area for any purpose, provided such use does not materially interfere with the rights and privileges hereby
authorized."
As far as running a ski resort goes. It is effectively exclusive.
If you're going to argue a case there's no point trying to mislead people about the facts. It's going to come back and burn you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Fairwages, As @olderscot, pointed out it is exclusive as previously discussed. If it's not exclusive then just get on and do it.
| Quote: |
they pay the Forest service much less than they pay Talisker corp for their (presumably exclusive) Canyons/PC lease.
|
It doesn't matter whether they pay them $1 or $1m. It's irrelevant.
| Quote: |
Yes, I would be willing to offer the Forest Service a higher revenue split for ski school than the 1.5 to 4% of revenue VR currently pays- no need for the public purse to suffer.
|
I think you have missed the point. If the FS removes the exclusivity clause then I dare say Vail Resorts would quite reasonably reduce their payment/bid/contribution by many tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Are you saying that you would make up that difference? Thought not.
| Quote: |
FWIW, if the goal of the Forest Service is to maximize revenue, they could charge VR (or another operator) a higher fee on premium areas like Vail.
|
I would be extremely surprised if the FS didn't believe that Vail was offering the best value proposition. If you think otherwise then raise a stink and allege incompetence, corruption etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Regardless of whether it's in line with the market, in the best interests of the forestry service or whatever, to me, charging that much and paying that little is exploitative. It's wages like that that drive down the quality of instructors and spoil the skiing experience for students.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
spoil the skiing experience for students.
|
That's my natural reaction as well, but on the other hand you have to wonder what kind of people ski at Vail and pay those prices and what kind of tuition are they expecting? You'd also expect the operators to be closely monitoring skier satisfaction and making sure it stays high.
And maybe that's the only way the instructors can do anything about. By changing customers opinion in a way that reflects badly on the resort operators. The trouble I see is that the operators won't just sit back and let them ruin their reputation and as the employer they're also not going to give jobs to the people who are causing the problems.
It's a tough nut to crack and to me really needs an outside organisation that can fight on the instructors behalf. That way it has greater resources to back it up, can highlight some of the worst practices in the industry, and nothing can come back onto the individual instructors. A union was mentioned earlier, but given the nature of the industry I'd have thought an organisation similar to BASI (in concept perhaps rather than implementation) that would be prepared to work on improving instructors pay and conditions would be a better approach.
PS. It appears the PSIA-AASI with 30,000 members restricts itself to purely certification standards and education. Maybe they're the people you need to work on and get them to take on pay and conditions. It could welly take a good few years and lot's of lobbying and politics to get it taken up but might well be the best (onloy?) option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
