 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hello everyone,
This is happening thousands of kilometers away, and many of you may have read about this at TGR or EpicSki. But the ski community is a tight knit bunch, and we all know people who know people. Basically a young patroller caught the owner of Sunshine Village's son (Taylor Scurfield) skiing in a closed area. Taylor got extremely mouthy and aggressive, and was escorted to the base and had his pass taken away for a short time. Taylor Scurfield exclaimed that the patrol would "pay."
Soon afterward, several senior patrollers who accumulate upwards of 60 years of experience were fired without legitimate cause. Several since then have also been fired.
Regardless of how far away this place is, I would encourage you to check out the facebook page below and read the info section explaining the whole chronology of the affair. Email Sunshine Village and express your displeasure.
I encourage you to all keep the Bow Valley in mind, there is plenty of fantastic terrain to ski, but mark Sunshine Village off your travel list. I wouldn't feel safe skiing there at this point.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/SupportSkiPatrol
Cheers for giving this a few minutes of your time.
Hope you're all enjoying the epic season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, If the two events are indeed connected then it is good reason for your request to
| Quote: |
mark Sunshine Village off your travel list
|
but we have to bear in mind that we only have one side of the story which makes, making an informed judgement somewhat difficult, and whilst you are obviously rightly passionate about the cause, it is not necessarily the case that the resort safety is now compromised. If there are genuine safety issues then these should be pursued directly with the authorities and not on an internet forum.
It strikes me that if the 'boy' did make 'patrol pay' as you suggest then the actions of the owner were entirely wrong. I know nothing of the labour laws over with you, do you not have a strong claim for 'unfair dismisal' against the management?
Whilst seemingly worthwhile, by asking us to boycott the place you may be dragging yourselves down to the owners level, and it is highly unlikely that the action will get any of the guys their jobs back, in fact a widespread boycott would only result in a larger number of people loosing their jobs.
I wish you and the rest of the guys the very best of luck but would urge you to use a different approach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Bollox, the owner and his son are obviously a right pair of bullies. I for one will not be honouring the place with my cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, Thanks - you will find details of this issue in other threads- and the TGR thread on it shows the owner's family in an interesting light...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, Been following this story from its start on the other threads, as am a big fan of Banff and the Bow Valley ski areas, having been there 5 times over the years. Shocking to hear how the Scurfields are managing SSV and treating their staff. You've got a extra supporter on FB from me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, Been following this story from its start on the other threads, as am a big fan of Banff and the Bow Valley ski areas, having been there 5 times over the years. Shocking to hear how the Scurfields are managing SSV and treating their staff. You've got a extra supporter on FB from me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kevindonkleywood, I was just giving an alternate point of view  I have know evidence whatsoever, apart from a few stories on the web....... and that was all the ammo I needed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I think i'm with kevindonkleywood on this.
The people you're appealing to on this forum are largely a different audience from other forums based in Canada and the US.
If any great number of people all of a sudden stop travelling to Banff due to boycott then you could actually bring down jobs not only at Sunshine but also in the town of Banff itself and at other ski resorts in the area. It's worth pointing out that a lot of people who travel to Banff do so with the promise of skiing at least 3 or 4 resorts and that Sunshine is a major attraction in that package. If, for whatever reason, that lure is removed, then tourists will not be able to justify making the trip and will head elsewhere instead.
Yep, sounds like the owners/management have been completely wrong with their stance and i feel for those affected so far, but to call for a mass boycott is just as irresponsible.
The facts are out there, and if people want to find them then let them make their own minds up without prejudice. As it stands, a vast number of visitors to Banff won't have a clue what's going on there until they get there and it's too late. You won't make any friends/supporters with those whose holiday you ruin by shutting down completely the ski hill that they've travelled 1,000s of miles to ski.
Good luck with finding a solution, but i think this is going about it the wrong way.
Question for you; What do you expect to achieve from all of this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frosty the Snowman, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, spoilt brat gets told off for being naughty, daddy therefore sacks people. Its a disgrace but like kevindonkleywood hints at - move on. Gits like 'daddy' don't give a crap and when is comes down to it, joe public rarely does anything about it. You just end up angry and frustrated. Sorry Dude 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I recognize that this is a very different audience than the forums in Canada and America. This is exactly the reason I have posted this message here. What are my intentions? To bring a serious issue of employer abuse to light and to inform potential visitors to the Bow Valley area of an issue that is pertinent to their safety. I also understand that the repercussions this circumstance are potentially devastating to people across the valley. But that isn't really a valid argument. If Sunshine Village management chose to operate with integrity and transparency then this wouldn't be an issue. The burden of responsibility does not lay on me for spreading information.
Indeed holiday makers choose the Bow Valley for the options available to them, but certainly they also choose this area for the history of professionalism and safety that makes the area world class. Isn't the behavior of Sunshine Village, irrespective of your opinion and faith in the patrol in question, in discord with those expectations?
Look into the situation, read the reports, question Sunshine Village's illogical silence. Seriously, why would these patrolers take the resort to court for for unlawful dismissal if they did not feel they had a legitimate case?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, on the face of it, I have enormous sympathy with your predicament. These people presumably have some kind of PR apparatus? What has been "their side of the story".
Good luck with your legal case. Please keep us informed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
They have been inexplicably silent, and very unsophisticated with their PR management.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, I too have enormous sympathy for the patrollers (and relative) concerned. But what saddens me is that I think it's just a face of modern life, if you're not getting effed over by a family like this then it'd be Intrawest. We are all but fleas on the corporate dog.
I really do hope that LL/KH/Fernie and all the other big hitters out there will give the men affected jobs - although I understand that not everyone is able to relocate or even willing to.
I am happy to boycott SSV - particularly in light of the whole buses fiasco - from what I've read LL have done themselves proud this season with not only continuing to run the free buses to the hotels in LL but also extended the service!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Alexandra wrote: |
| If you're not getting effed over by a family like this then it'd be Intrawest. We are all but fleas on the corporate dog. |
I thought Intrawest had shot that dog in the face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Alexandra I agree, but I can't help but hope that if enough fleas choose to bite at the same time, then the dog might decide to not roll in the sh@t nearly as often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
PatrollersNeedSupport, glad to hear they are taking them to court, I wish them the best of luck. I'll also join the fb page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Nice to see some other SH have also joined up 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I have the greatest sympathy for anyone who loses their job, but this 'eye for an eye' type conflict helps no one.
PatrollersNeedSupport,
| Quote: |
Seriously, why would these patrolers take the resort to court for for unlawful dismissal if they did not feel they had a legitimate case?
|
If they have a legitimate case that is for the court to decide upon.
The secondary action of shutting the mountain down and the sackings that resulted from that simply weaken the case for the original patrolers who lost their jobs. Im sorry but 'professional' teams do not decide to all call in sick and put other peoples jobs at risk whilst disagreements are in court. Any $2 lawyer will use these actions to support the owners by showing how poorly disciplined and unprofessional the team were, even if that is not originally the case.
The subsequent actions of the rest of the patrolers and the publicity that now surrounds their case would in most industries make them 'untouchables' for re-employment as generally employers would look at the disruption and media coverage and choose to employ someone else.
If the owners behaviour is as widely reported then the actions of the boycott request are unlikely to make labour relations any better and could spark a 'scorched earth' reaction with more job losses. Sadly at the end of the day the owners are the employers and unpleasant and difficult as it may seem comfrontation will not get anyone their jobs back but will risk the jobs of others which is IMV arrogant and selfish.
You will have to make a choice at some point, do you keep escalating the dispute and drawing in more and more people or do you sit down, breath deeply, appologise and accept that actually no company owes you a living anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whatever the merits of each side's position, the patrollers are definitely winning the PR war and there seem to be enough respectable voices in the local ski community on their side from what I can see (i.e. more than just some rabble rousing).
Personally my analysis is in the absence of a statement from Sunshine is that its extremely bad management to terminate a whole bunch of employees who are critical to the safety of guests and the ability to deliver a full service offering to guests IF you haven't planned the succession properly EVEN IF you have fair cause. This makes me doubt that fair cause really exists over such a large number of employees. I haven't skied Sunshine in a few years but this case is hardly going to want to make me return I guess we'll see if defence statements to the action published by Sunshine subsequently change my mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting to compare this to the Whistler dog story. In both cases there's a danger to 'those remaining' by boycotting the people who have seemingly made some very poor (/illegal/disgusting, depending on view) decisions. In fact the danger to the dogs is clearly higher. I don't think many people would be arguing against a boycott of the dog-sledding operation, though, and I don't see much reason not to boycott Sunshine Village in this case (assuming you decide you're upset with the way management there have behaved).
Not on facebook, but if I were I think I'd have signed up...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Plenty of other places to try in the US and Canada. Give your cash to another resort until they screw it up aswell, then move onto the next.
Everyone go to Big Sky www.bigskyresort.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
actually no company owes you a living anymore.
|
but they do owe you the right to only be dismissed fairly.
For what it's worth I believe the Court action only started a day or so ago. The other action was obviously more knee jerk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Do the Patrollers want to be reinstated? If so a protest (e.g. physical blockage etc) or threat of a such a thing with high profile TV coverage might work.
If boss makes an unfair decision his business could go under for a new owner to snap it up at a good price. The new owner could then reinstate the Patrollers and the resort gets a happy end story with loads of publicity which can only be good for the business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Imagine the chaos had the owners tried this in France 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisWo, Im not sure what do people think will be the outcome of a boycott there either  as has been rightly pointed out working animals have always been destroyed when they cannot earn their keep. A boycott because you objected to the manner and the number of culled animals will simply lead to the culling of more animals.
Life is never as black and white as it seems from inside a dispute, when you look in from outside both sides are nearly always a dirty shade of grey.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
kevindonkleywood, i'm not sure he's asking for a boycott. he's making the very reasonable point that the ski patrol has lost some of its most experienced safety people in a dubious manner and people might want to consider their own safety before skiing at Sunshine
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Arno wrote: |
| kevindonkleywood, i'm not sure he's asking for a boycott. he's making the very reasonable point that the ski patrol has lost some of its most experienced safety people in a dubious manner and people might want to consider their own safety before skiing at Sunshine |
Indeed and no sense in season pass holders boycotting the resort, they can best register their dissatisfaction by maximising their skier days and minimizing their daily spend. I have to say that if I bought a season pass there in the expectation of skiing higher level terrain and patrol staffing levels meant that such terrain could not be open I'd be pretty unhappy even if I was neutral to the cause of the dismissed patrollers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| kevindonkleywood wrote: |
So the slow decline of the resort and the loss of associated jobs over a period of several years is a happy ending
|
If the boss is guilty then I'd expect a quick decline which will hit the business hard and fast pushing the owners to act fairly and quickly or be pushed out for a new owner.
With your solution the meathead stays where he is and gets fined. Those sacked don't get their jobs back and the remaining employees stay working for the meathead who is now peed off.
With my possible solution the Boss gets ousted and the resort gets great publicity with a new owner, those sacked get their jobs back.
America is a democracy isn't it? If there's such a strong case let the people speak I say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
mark Sunshine Village off your travel list. I wouldn't feel safe skiing there at this point.
|
due to lack of ski patrol... I best stop skiing in Austria then, i didn't realise it would be so bad for my health
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Arno, fair point but it adds up to the same thing IMV especially given the wording.
| Quote: |
I encourage you to all keep the Bow Valley in mind, there is plenty of fantastic terrain to ski, but mark Sunshine Village off your travel list. I wouldn't feel safe skiing there at this point.
|
I'm sure the Mt Sunshine's Insurance company may have 'a view' on the safety issue if it is true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
With my possible solution the Boss gets ousted and the resort gets great publicity with a new owner, those sacked get their jobs back.
|
I think that Im becoming terminally cynical in my old age but I can't see any buisiness wanting to reinstate them, Particularly as a group.
but then I have been known to be very very wrong on many occasions
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
kevindonkleywood, you're not really convincing me 
Regardless of whether a boycott is being asked for or not, I guess the individual consumer's decision comes down to whether they disagree with the actions being taken by a company and, if so, whether they disagree enough that they want to do something about it (which would have to include an assessment of the knock-on effects). Fundamentally a boycott or other action by customers is likely to cause a company to change (tho not always for the better!), if it gathers sufficient momentum.
The world where you see something bad happening and decide that there's no point doing anything about it because you can't be bothered/think it won't make any difference isn't a hugely promising place... But I realise I'm straying massively off topic here, and verging on all sorts of hyperbole, so will happily leave the train of nonsense there for now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| kevindonkleywood wrote: |
| Quote: |
With my possible solution the Boss gets ousted and the resort gets great publicity with a new owner, those sacked get their jobs back.
|
I think that Im becoming terminally cynical in my old age but I can't see any buisiness wanting to reinstate them, Particularly as a group.
but then I have been known to be very very wrong on many occasions |
Why wouldn't someone want to employ snow safety professionals with many years experience handling some quite severe and problematic terrain? I guess their specific knowledge of Sunshine is a major asset and that a new owner prepared to start with a clean slate might well want people who knew the area well. Bandaging people up and sledding them down is one thing, having the experience and history to make major judgement calls on whether to open an avy risk area to the public is another.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
fatbob, They may be excellent people and have a great level of experience but having been at the centre of a dispute that shut the mountain and had worldwide negative publicity to put them back together as a group may well be a difficult balance of power for a new owner to accept. (Im not talking about the initial sackings here)
Also being such experienced people I suspect they are not the cheapest professionals on the hill, most buisnesses welcome every opertunity to keep their costs down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kevindonkleywood, I understand the point and tend to agree that's the way many businesses would act. I'm no expert on labour law especially in Canada but I imagine if they win their case it would be very difficult for prospective employers to actively discriminate against them on this point without being themselves vulnerable to action but of course many businesses can establish "objective" criteria why they didn't make the interview list
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
