 Poster: A snowHead
|
Perhaps it varies from country to country, and even resort to resort, but when do the incumbent ski schools and/or their (official or unofficial) police demand that apparent instructors become authorised/licensed/qualified?
I presume it's some combination of the following clauses:
1) When PERSON A appears to be instructing PERSON B to ski/snowboard/skate/etc.
1a) If A is unknown to B
1b) Unless A is a friend/acquaintance of B (boy/girlfriend)
1c) Unless A is a companion of B (in same package/accommodation/group-booking)
1d) Unless A is a partner of B (cohabiting, business, marital)
1e) Unless A is a relation of B (father, brother, cousin, etc.)
1f) Irrespective of A's relation to B
2) Only if they have been explicitly hired to instruct
3) If they are directly or indirectly being rewarded, e.g. chalet staff
4) Even if there is no evidence of instruction, but it may be potentially provided, e.g. guiding
5) If A is found to be engaged in such activity:
5a) with more than a certain number of people,
5b) more than a certain number of times,
5c) for longer than a particular period.
6) Only if A is in possession of a lift pass or is on resort property
7) Other criteria
I'm particularly interested in large French resorts such as 3V,EK, PdS, etc. and the clause 1e. For example, is it so bad these days that if a dad is found teaching his son to ski, that both passes will be confiscated, or worse...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
No. That would be ridiculous.
A step for a hint, a uniform and a commercial arrangement and habitual performance might begin to raise some eyebrows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| No. That would be ridiculous. |
Yeah, sure. But, what would be ridiculous to us, soon becomes right and proper to the next generation - brought up to expect ever greater profiteering, oops, I mean obligatory consideration for the health and safety of all skiers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I think its quite simple.
Are you being renumerated in any way.
No = do what you please. Teach who you please.
Getting paid = you need the right qualification
I believe that's how the French view it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Absolutely. Dead simple. A non problem. Its rather similar to the situation with boats in the UK. I can take you out for a ride in my boat despite having no relevant skills or safety equipment. But if you are a paying passenger there are a host of regulations with which the boatman and the boat have to comply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
So, ok, it seems that the consensus (from a small sample) is that of course resorts will turn a blind eye to 'friends instructing friends on an unpaid basis'. I still wouldn't be surprised to hear of the odd US resort clamping down on it though.
Anyway, for argument's sake, let us imagine a bunch of beginners who have brought* an abundantly skilled, but unlicensed/unqualified ski instructor with them on an all-expenses-paid luxury chalet ski holiday - on the tacit 'nudge-nudge' condition that, in exchange, they teach them to ski. Presumably this already happens. Anyone know if there are attempts to clamp down on such unlicensed instruction?
* Potentially, upon the luxury ski chalet's recommendation. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| geeo wrote: |
I think its quite simple.
Are you being renumerated in any way.
No = do what you please. Teach who you please.
Getting paid = you need the right qualification
I believe that's how the French view it. |
The only caveat being that if you put yourself forward as the one with the experience and anything goes wrong, the French system could hold you personally responsible...at least that is my understanding.
The case being brought against the SCGB Guide hinges around what constitutes remuneration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
So, ok, it seems that the consensus (from a small sample) is that of course resorts will turn a blind eye to 'friends instructing friends on an unpaid basis'.
|
No, it's quite simple, there is no blind eyes, if you ain't being paid there is NO ISSUE.
You can make as many what if scenario's as you like but nothing changes, being taken on holiday to teach people and not paying for that holiday which is what i assume you mean, is renumeration.
Last edited by After all it is free  on Sun 20-03-16 14:52; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
The only caveat being that if you put yourself forward as the one with the experience and anything goes wrong, the French system could hold you personally responsible...at least that is my understanding.
|
No not a caveat if you are being paid, then you are assuming the leader role and you are responsible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| The case being brought against the SCGB Guide hinges around what constitutes remuneration. |
That's an interesting case in point. Was this guy stopped/arrested/harassed/intimidated first, and questions asked later - in case remuneration could be established - or, was he a 'specimen candidate' preselected by the ESF in their plan to clamp down on the SCGB's guiding activites?
The thing is, if people appearing to guide/instruct are hassled on suspicion of doing so illicitly (withdrawing ski pass until lack of remuneration can be established), it's still effectively policing/suppressing 'friends teaching friends'. And no doubt such policing/intimidation will escalate with SCGB pushing its "new CatchUp service for members" - as if in retaliation against ESF.
The principle of unremunerated tuition being permitted is all very well, but it's the practice we really need to know about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@geeo, I agree. Talk of "turning blind eyes" is getting it wrong. French resorts are full of kids learning to ski with parents or grandparents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| @geeo, I agree. Talk of "turning blind eyes" is getting it wrong. French resorts are full of kids learning to ski with parents or grandparents. |
Ditto Swiss resorts. No issues teaching friends, family as long as there's no money changing hands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| geeo wrote: |
| Quote: |
The only caveat being that if you put yourself forward as the one with the experience and anything goes wrong, the French system could hold you personally responsible...at least that is my understanding.
|
No not a caveat if you are being paid, then you are assuming the leader role and you are responsible. |
I was only referring to unpaid holiday makers, who take the lead (as they are more familiar with the resort), or try to help others with their skiing....of course, if you are a paid instructor, you are responsible for your charge (along with the ski school).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| telford_mike wrote: |
| No issues teaching friends, family as long as there's no money changing hands. |
Fortunately, the ski police can easily tell the difference between people instructing for money, and people instructing altruistically. The latter instructors have a golden halo hovering above their heads.
This means the police never need to hassle them, let alone confiscate their pass until such time as it can be established they aren't being remunerated in some direct or indirect way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
If you are experienced in an activity and you go out with a group of inexperienced friends to do that activity then legally (and morally) you are responsible for their welfare. I believe it's the same in France as the UK. Your mates may all accept that you're helping them in good faith but their relatives may not be so generous. If you have some sort of certificate of competence then it becomes very difficult to avoid this liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| crosbie wrote: |
| telford_mike wrote: |
| No issues teaching friends, family as long as there's no money changing hands. |
Fortunately, the ski police can easily tell the difference between people instructing for money, and people instructing altruistically. The latter instructors have a golden halo hovering above their heads.
This means the police never need to hassle them, let alone confiscate their pass until such time as it can be established they aren't being remunerated in some direct or indirect way.
|
Ski Police? Who are they? We don't even have bobbies on the beat here, never mind Ski Police!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| telford_mike wrote: |
| crosbie wrote: |
| telford_mike wrote: |
| No issues teaching friends, family as long as there's no money changing hands. |
Fortunately, the ski police can easily tell the difference between people instructing for money, and people instructing altruistically. The latter instructors have a golden halo hovering above their heads.
This means the police never need to hassle them, let alone confiscate their pass until such time as it can be established they aren't being remunerated in some direct or indirect way.
|
Ski Police? Who are they? We don't even have bobbies on the beat here, never mind Ski Police! |
They are the ones on skidoos with the blue whirly lights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| TQA wrote: |
| telford_mike wrote: |
| crosbie wrote: |
| telford_mike wrote: |
| No issues teaching friends, family as long as there's no money changing hands. |
Fortunately, the ski police can easily tell the difference between people instructing for money, and people instructing altruistically. The latter instructors have a golden halo hovering above their heads.
This means the police never need to hassle them, let alone confiscate their pass until such time as it can be established they aren't being remunerated in some direct or indirect way.
|
Ski Police? Who are they? We don't even have bobbies on the beat here, never mind Ski Police! |
They are the ones on skidoos with the blue whirly lights. |
Ah right. I must have missed them over the past 25 years. Probably too busy teaching a mate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
By 'ski police' I mean 'anyone actively or passively policing the pistes for illicit (non-ESF) ski instructors' such as ESF* instructors and staff, lift operators, piste patrollers, etc. NOT just those in police uniform.
Such 'ski police' may then escalate things until the uniformed police are involved.
* Or the equivalent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@crosbie, you seem to be a bit paranoid. Between us, Snowheads have spent countless man years across many parts of the Alps and I don't recall any reports of the kind of harassment you're talking about, confiscation of ski pass etc. Indeed, I'd like to see rather more confiscation of ski passes, when people are skiing out of control and endangering others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| @crosbie, you seem to be a bit paranoid. Between us, Snowheads have spent countless man years across many parts of the Alps and I don't recall any reports of the kind of harassment you're talking about, confiscation of ski pass etc. |
Paranoid?
| Quote: |
| In April, French police stopped Mr Piddlesden, saying he was breaking French law, which stipulates no one can "lead people round the mountains for remuneration unless they are suitably qualified ski instructors". |
The ESF evidently don't like competition in any form. The question is not "Can I prove I'm not being remunerated", but "Will I be stopped on suspicion?"
| pam w wrote: |
| Indeed, I'd like to see rather more confiscation of ski passes, when people are skiing out of control and endangering others. |
There'll be more people out of control, endangering others, if they aren't permitted to be inexpensively taught by friendly experts (even unpaid ones stopped on suspicion of being paid).
This is what happens upon regulatory capture - there's a polarisation between those who can afford the monopoly rent (the consequently proficient), and those who cannot (the self-taught, and consequently less proficient).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| crosbie wrote: |
By 'ski police' I mean 'anyone actively or passively policing the pistes for illicit (non-ESF) ski instructors' such as ESF* instructors and staff, lift operators, piste patrollers, etc. NOT just those in police uniform.
Such 'ski police' may then escalate things until the uniformed police are involved.
* Or the equivalent. |
Simply doesn't happen here. The Swiss Ski School don't have any kind of monopoly on teaching. Anyone with the right international qualification can set up a ski school. There are no local 'equivalence' tests. And if a more experienced skier is helping a mate, or even a group of mates, for no commercial gain, the Swiss would regard that as their business and nobody else's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| crosbie wrote: |
Anyway, for argument's sake, let us imagine a bunch of beginners who have brought* an abundantly skilled, but unlicensed/unqualified ski instructor with them on an all-expenses-paid luxury chalet ski holiday - on the tacit 'nudge-nudge' condition that, in exchange, they teach them to ski. Presumably this already happens. Anyone know if there are attempts to clamp down on such unlicensed instruction?
* Potentially, upon the luxury ski chalet's recommendation. |
The Authorities are way ahead of you on that one in France, the beginners are paying the ski instructor, end of discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
You're flogging a dead horse here, @crosbie. Even in my little resort there are two competing ski schools and big French resorts have a lot more. ESF is often the cheapest, but not necessarily the best value. Talk of "monopoly rents" is wide of the mark (though was possibly relevant for ski hire in St Anton at one point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@pam w, I think he/she's just a bit bored. And doesn't understand the realities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| @pam w, I think he/she's just a bit bored. And doesn't understand the realities. |
Ok, let's revisit the situation in a decade's time and find out if things have become more or less regulated, more or less rigorously policed...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
It isn't policed at all at the moment!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| geeo wrote: |
I think its quite simple.
Are you being renumerated in any way.
No = do what you please. Teach who you please.
Getting paid = you need the right qualification
I believe that's how the French view it. |
The only caveat being that if you put yourself forward as the one with the experience and anything goes wrong, the French system could hold you personally responsible...at least that is my understanding.
The case being brought against the SCGB Guide hinges around what constitutes remuneration. |
In developed countries, like France:
* Paid directly and fully or partly by currency = qualification and insurance always needed (e.g. instructor);
* Paid indirectly and fully or partly by currency = qualification and insurance sometimes needed (e.g. SCGB guide);
* Paid indirectly and fully or partly by barter = qualification and insurance sometimes needed in extremis (e.g. free vacation for free tuition);
* Unpaid and informal = qualification and insurance never needed, but may be suable or prosecutable in extremis (e.g. friend-to-friend tuition ).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| telford_mike wrote: |
| It isn't policed at all at the moment! |
It is policed in the big french resorts. Someone from the french sports ministry makes random checks on instructors a few days each year in each resort. They are mostly checking uniformed instructors have the correct up to date paperwork. They do not in any way harass what is obviously a parent teaching their kid. If an instructor cannot produce all the correct paperwork they are not hauled off to the cells but just given a notice to produce it at the local police station in the next few days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I have dug out a SCGB article from Oct 2014, where Colin Nicholson covered the court case of Simon Butler (the English Ski instructor who faced prison). During the trial, Colin came up with some interesting info.
When France was challenged as having an anti-competitive system favouring their own instructors, they introduced the Eurotest, which must be passed by everyone (including the French) - Men must complete a GS course within 18% of the time of the reigning world champion...and for women it's 24%.
This test is a very tough one to pass...at the time of the article, there were only 345 UK-Qualified instructors who are allowed to apply to work independently in France.
According to the article, despite the fact that it appears to be one rule for all, most fully qualified French Instructors have not met the criterion of this exacting race.
They are allowed to practice, because they have claimed "Grandfather Rights", by virtue of being instructors before the introduction of the Eurotest in 2004.
It was revealed that only 350 instructors pass the test every year..taking the prosecutors figure of 17000 ESF instructors, of whom 15000 are still practicing, this suggested that the vast majority are "Grandfathers".
Butler himself should have fallen under the Grandfather rule, but due to a row with BASI, doesn't have the requisite stamp to prove his Level 4 status.
Butler's six instructors have BASI 2 and 3 qualifications, which allows them to teach in some countries, but doesn't allow them to teach in France without the Eurotest, unless they work as trainees at a French Ski school...even then, they would have to pass their "Test Technique" (another race that requires them to ski in 28% of the world champion's time).
But this is still not the whole story....Not only have so many French Ski Instructors not passed the Eurotest, but as many as half of the instructors you see on French slopes have yet to qualify - they are stagieres or trainees.
When Apertet (prosecutor) was asked by Colin to qualify the situation, he said that Instructors could only remain Trainees for 4 years...but he readily accepted that this could turn into 5 or 6 years, or even more. Butler argued having so many Trainees was a source of cheap labour.
It might seem the obvious solution would be for Butler to run his own Trainee Scheme, but this is made impossible due to more obstructive rules...In order to qualify, any ski school must have 10 fully qualified instructors and access to a fully dedicated race slope.
Apertet informed Colin that Trainees were always supervised....This was disputed by Philip May (one of Butler's Instructors). He said that when he tried to qualify under the French Trainee system, in practice, he was often on the other side of the mountain to his "maitre de stage", only in contact over the radio.
Butler has vowed to continue the fight, taking the case to the European Court of Justice, if necessary.
Sorry for the length of the post, but I thought some might find it of interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Somehow I just knew this thread would end up being linked to the Simon Butler case.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| telford_mike wrote: |
Somehow I just knew this thread would end up being linked to the Simon Butler case.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT! |
The case was merely a side issue...It was purely a way of referencing an article which perported to highlight the ways in which the French tilt the system to their advantage and get around the legislation.....which I thought was absolutely the point of the thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
No, the point was that the ski police are prone to swooping on people teaching friends and family, confiscating lift passes and generally being unpleasant.
AFAIK it doesn't happen, isn't an issue. The regulations only apply to professional instructors. Some examples of instructors being asked for their papers, in France and Italy, have been reported.
The Simon Butler case, extensively covered here, is sui generis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
The wording of that French law ("no one can lead people round the mountains for remuneration unless they are suitably qualified ski instructors") suggests it would preclude on-piste guiding of the kind often provided gratis by chalet companies? Does anyone know that sort of thing been affected? It's four years since I did a chalet holiday, but I used to enjoy joining in with that for two or three days in a week. No instruction was ever involved, just a young person (usually) leading maybe a dozen chalet guests along good routes around the ski area showing them the best/quietest pistes and a nice mountain restaurant or two. Nothing you couldn't get from a piste map really, but without the hassle, the stopping or the cold hands. It would be a shame - and frankly ridiculous - if that had been outlawed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Ingemar_Skidmark wrote: |
| The wording of that French law ("no one can lead people round the mountains for remuneration unless they are suitably qualified ski instructors") suggests it would preclude on-piste guiding of the kind often provided gratis by chalet companies? Does anyone know that sort of thing been affected? It's four years since I did a chalet holiday, but I used to enjoy joining in with that for two or three days in a week. No instruction was ever involved, just a young person (usually) leading maybe a dozen chalet guests along good routes around the ski area showing them the best/quietest pistes and a nice mountain restaurant or two. Nothing you couldn't get from a piste map really, but without the hassle, the stopping or the cold hands. It would be a shame - and frankly ridiculous - if that had been outlawed. |
As far as I know, the only companies offering free guiding in France, have had to hire suitably qualified instructors....same as the SCGB (except there is a small fee with the Ski Club).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Ingemar_Skidmark wrote: |
| The wording of that French law ("no one can lead people round the mountains for remuneration unless they are suitably qualified ski instructors") suggests it would preclude on-piste guiding of the kind often provided gratis by chalet companies? Does anyone know that sort of thing been affected? It's four years since I did a chalet holiday, but I used to enjoy joining in with that for two or three days in a week. No instruction was ever involved, just a young person (usually) leading maybe a dozen chalet guests along good routes around the ski area showing them the best/quietest pistes and a nice mountain restaurant or two. Nothing you couldn't get from a piste map really, but without the hassle, the stopping or the cold hands. It would be a shame - and frankly ridiculous - if that had been outlawed. |
Well it has been, from the big boys down to the independents as it was deemed these "guides" were recieving remuneration and had no qualifications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's the notion that showing people around the ski area, down regular, marked, pistes can be deemed 'instruction' or require full French instructor qualification that seems ludicrous to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ingemar_Skidmark wrote: |
| It's the notion that showing people around the ski area, down regular, marked, pistes can be deemed 'instruction' or require full French instructor qualification that seems ludicrous to me. |
...and to me.
For a good while after the TOs were forced to stop (as their staff were being thrown in prison for the night), the SCGB was able to carry out their guiding service....but they too were on borrowed time, as one of their people was arrested, causing them to suspend their operation in France.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@crosbie, well, you know, I've been watching this for about 28 years and counting and nothing significant has changed.
Please wake me up when it does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@crosbie, well, you know, I've been watching this for about 28 years and counting and nothing significant has changed.
Please wake me up when it does. |
So you were watching when things changed from "Show your lift pass" to "Show your lift pass with photo" to "Machine readable skipass" to "Hands free pass in pocket" to "Hands free pass with automatic photo to prevent sharing"?
And from laissez faire 'Anyone can teach/guide/accompany anyone for love or money' to regulated 'licensed tuition only, subject to qualification, with special exemption for ESF'?
Actually, the trouble is that these things change slowly, and so, like watching a clock, it is difficult to notice any change while your're looking. If anything, it is only if you go to sleep and wake up that you notice the clock has changed in a big way.
The next step (wangled by ESF) will be to require that anyone engaging in any friendly/unpaid tuition (friend/friend, parent/child) must first obtain a 'non-professional instructor permit' from the ski resort tourist information office, which can be provided to anyone (for a small fee) for a maximum duration of two weeks per season. This will also necessitate wearing an armband identifying the wearer as a permit holding non-professional instructor.
This trajectory is obvious. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
