 Poster: A snowHead
|
Guys,
Wow cant belive how personal and heated this got?
Masque, you are fully entitled to you opinion and to share your experience and the potential pitfalls with all on the forum of what could go wrong but the flogging of a dead horse is going a bit far.
What is on offer here is a casual arrangement for between two parties where one gets cheap and cheerful baby/house sitting and cooking and the other gets cheap accommodation and time on snow. I personally do not belive there are any laws being broken or any individuals human rights are being trampled on here
If both parties find this acceptable and can reach an accord on how to proceed so be it. Not sure why the thread should be pulled as no one can definitively prove the legal implications if any of this agreement under swiss law. I think NIXMAP has been very clever in realising that plenty of people will do anything to get a season on snow and here is a chance to do it for free with none of the pains of working for a TO
Looking after the kids parent have a right to choose who babysits there kids be they qualified or not I know plenty of people who use 16-20 year old girls to babysit there kids every weekend.
Masque,Just because you personally had a negative experience it does not mean everyone out there treats the serfs in the same manner 
Really cant believe it took 12 pages of this to get to some sort of conclusion
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
13 pages, long thread. my opinion ..... well i think personally monkey nuts have the edge over peanuts but what do i know? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Axsman wrote: |
achilles, Agenterre, It's no wonder the world is going to the lawyers! 
While those of us 50 and over will probably give some thought to all the 'what could go wrong' possibilities before doing anything, my guess is that many, somewhat younger folk, might just think WTF and do it anyway.
Life is risk, sliding down mountains is risk, staying in hotels is risk, paragliding is risk, body boarding is risk, sunbathing is risk etc etc etc. should we let worries over risk/insurance/regulation prevent us doing anything but sitting at home by the TV?
Trying to avoid having to jump through all the hoops and bureaucracy surrounding taxation (who doesn't relish beating the tax man?), insurance (what should be insured against what exactly?), ski instruction (a closed shop if ever there was one) and some not yet introduced, somewhat contraversial, and possibly unworkable rules on babysitting (they are talking about aunts and uncles needing to be 'scrutinised' by the state before being allowed to babysit FFS!) doesn't seem like the crime of the century to me.
IMHO it's up to nixmap to judge the suitability of candidates to look after his house and family, and up to the candidates to judge whether he's a scrooge or a pussycat.
Good luck to them all!  |
as a lawyer, it depresses me that people feel the need to get so legalistic over what will hopefully be an informal arrangement between 2 sensible adults
i like the term wikilawyer, BTW, and plan to use it liberally and in as condescending a fashion as possible  so for that I have nixmap to thank
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Ordhan wrote: |
| ......What is on offer here is a casual arrangement for between two parties where one gets cheap and cheerful baby/house sitting and cooking and the other gets cheap accommodation and time on snow.... |
Or a crooked deal to avoid paying for insurance, tax, and the 'wikilaw' covering child protection and professional ski instruction. Depends on your viewpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Arno, It's neither unusual or unlawful for small value quid-pro-quo casual arrangements to be completely safe and risk free. However this is a long-term situation that can easily be assessed values in the thousands and has quantifiable risks.
The OP's reticence to even discuss on a metaphorical or casual basis, the insurance and liability aspect of the deal is very worrying as is his laissez-faire toward acknowledging his obligations as an employer. It's taken considerable effort to squeeze a drop of information from his obdurate rock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
The OP's reticence to even discuss on a metaphorical or casual basis, the insurance and liability aspect of the deal is very worrying as is his laissez-faire toward acknowledging his obligations as an employer.
|
He is only an employer if he is paying you for your role which in this case he is not!
achilles, Probably a little from coloum A a little from Coloum B but with big benefits to both parties.
As are we going to be so synical to view every attempt attempt "you scratch my back ill scratch yours" as an attempt to avoid tax, legal obligations the world is not full of wicked witches in gingerbread houses there are some nice people out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordhan, I don't think anybody would want to stop good natured barter; I do think nixmap's offer stinks. I do not think he is one of the nice people out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| Ordhan, I don't think anybody would want to stop good natured barter; I do think nixmap's offer stinks. I do not think he is one of the nice people out there. |
I enjoy good natured banter but the sort of comments here were imo way way over the top.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbob, the comment you quoted was not meant to be good-natured banter. The thrust of debate in this thread has become quite clear. If you don't like it, don't read it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Ordhan wrote: |
Really cant believe it took 12 pages of this to get to some sort of conclusion |
I didnt believe it either
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 is an offer for goodness sake. If one doesn't like it, then don't apply. Seems a perfectly reasonable arrangement to me and I really can't see what all the fuss is about or why nixmap has been given such a rough ride.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frosty the Snowman, I don't think snowheads should become a safe haven for dodgy deals. You are quite entitled to think differently, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
achilles,
| Quote: |
I don't think snowheads should become a safe haven for dodgy deals.
|
I am presuming you have some solid evidence to back up that statment? As it is implying there is somthing inappropriate going on here?
We are all entitled to our opinion but we are not entitled to throw acusations around that are unfounded and have no basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Ordhan wrote: |
| He is only an employer if he is paying you for your role which in this case he is not! |
That would depend on who you talk to, in my case it was decided that three weeks was the limit. Had it been during the ski season itself they would have made an assessment. The rub is calculating the worth of 4-5 days worth of ski resort time against the calculable value of the professional standards and type of service stated. But of course we have to add the high days and holidays to the work mix and then the free days reduce down to 3-4 so that the value of the holiday time accommodation will almost certainly be exceeded by the tasks in hand . . . It is a job and that ski time and accommodation is pay. The more that Nixmap talks it up the greater the possible assessment to its value. I'm talking against myself in that sense, however I do not believe that just those few days are adequate recompense for the work time, the professional duties and additional expenses need from the applicants.
It's when something goes wrong, that's when the Swiss will get interested because there are a number of labour laws (local; and federal) and conditions that this is trying to run around. and it's not just Nixmap who will pay for that.
This offer is a wrong'un and that reflects on Nixmap himself. Pretty much the same thoughts were expressed on Natives, where from the gist of this thread
http://www.natives.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18019&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=81d55b2cd8c40f9653623319e97fa8b8
he had a similar ad removed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I wouldn't object to either the original "offer" or the subsequent argument if it could be an open debate about a proposition to match up somebody "cash rich and time poor" with some with complementary characteristics. That's an interesting idea.
Providing details only to applicants might be perfectly legitimate and normal for a job advert, but not to a thread which is supposed by definition (given the rules of the forum) to be nothing of the sort. If we are supposed to discuss the offer here, we need details. If not, and it's just an advertisement, then it shouldn't be here.
However, it's obviously been a thread which has entertained many people and got them thinking/arguing, even if debating with nixmap is like trying to throw darts at a marshmallow on a string.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| The thrust of debate in this thread has become quite clear. If you don't like it, don't read it. |
It has.
One person (now you make two) being very rude about another poster, who has been nothing but polite, on the basis of assumptions about what he hasn't posted.
While it does seem likely that at least some of those assumptions are valid, they are still only assumptions, not known facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| even if debating with nixmap is like trying to throw darts at a marshmallow on a string. |
I love that turn of phrase 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| jbob, the comment you quoted was not meant to be good-natured banter. The thrust of debate in this thread has become quite clear. If you don't like it, don't read it. |
I am fine with debate its constant personal abuse I don't like, that and being told what I should read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Anyway all is neatly summed up after 13 pages and somehow I have a feeling that the same offer will not be made available for next season 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
jbob, m'dear chap. I don't think I have been personally abusive of nixmap; discussion of his offer is another thing. Nor did I tell you what you should not look at. On the contrary, I pointed out that you had an option not to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| achilles wrote: |
| jbob, m'dear chap. I don't think I have been personally abusive of nixmap; discussion of his offer is another thing. Nor did I tell you what you should not look at. On the contrary, I pointed out that you had an option not to. |
I agree I wasn't referring to you as I don't think you have been abusive at all, which is more than can be said for much of the bile that has been posted on this thread which is worse than anything I have seen on snowheads before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
jbob, If you're talking about me and mine then I must hesitantly hold up a hand, but it was done with purpose and for a short period to draw as much information as possible into the thread further from my point of entry. nixmap would have gone a long way to defuse those had he not portrayed a metaphorically cheesy, deliberate insouciance to all and any query about particulars. From that I feel no reticence in labeling his OP wih 'Animus nocendi'.
I don't have an issue with the concept of this arrangement but in this particular situation, I believe the application if fundamentally flawed, dangerous to the applicant and damaging to this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Seriously now, I've found a load of stuff about Swiss contract law which I think sorts this issue out once and for all.
Swiss contract law explained.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
I have pm'd a mod and asked that this thread be pruned and then locked
enough is enough. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
I respect they have a very important role to play in society as we know it ( and the pickles real ones have dragged me out of !) but struggle with the negativity of endless 'argument' 
Hey ho. I was going to bin this thread, but since it's you 
didnt see the other 12...