A French court has today ruled that ski leading is not legal in France. The company defending the practice has said it will appeal the result .Please see link to report below.
http://www.planetski.eu/news/4683
They do not go on black runs or off piste and stick to gentle slopes. No instruction is given,” said the UK’s largest operator Crystal Ski.
Hard to feel too passionate about this service to be honest but that’s just me. As a side issue the Ski Club do seem to have stopped leading off-piste but the Eagle Ski Club do, sometimes. I can’t see the harm in it myself, I’ve never heard of an accident involving a TO led group, I guess they happen but it doesn’t seem to be something cropping up in the headlines all the time. It would be interesting to know the ESF viewpoint.
That said, the law appears to be clear in France
Article L212-1 En savoir plus sur cet article…
I.-Seuls peuvent, contre rémunération, enseigner, animer ou encadrer une activité physique ou sportive ou entraîner ses pratiquants, à titre d’occupation principale ou secondaire, de façon habituelle, saisonnière ou occasionnelle, sous réserve des dispositions du quatrième alinéa du présent article et de l’article L. 212-2 du présent code, les titulaires d’un diplôme, titre à finalité professionnelle ou certificat de qualification :
You can’t teach or lead groups as part of your employment in any shape or form unless you have a recognized professional qualification. So Le Ski were clearly breaking French law, which of course may be superseded by European legislation but does not appear to have been raised by their defense lawyer who concentrated on the “teaching” aspect according to the Dauphine Libere article I read.
Peanutski.eu have stuck with this story but I find their tone to be very jingoistic.
It will be interesting to read the courts full judgment -but it is a service that will be missed by many - including some of the less accessible restaurants!!
They do not go on black runs or off piste and stick to gentle slopes. No instruction is given,” said the UK’s largest operator Crystal Ski.
I can’t understand why they keep saying this, it’s the obvious tone of the internet debate but it really undermines their own argument.
It just makes it easy to say they’ve failed to understand the issue and makes it really easy to argue they don’t understand the environment they’re in.
Teaching is indeed totally irrelevant. When you break your leg it makes not a blind bit of difference if the last thing thing your host/instructor said was “let’s go to that cafe they do banging vin chaud” or if it was “blah blah inner tip lead”. The outcomes are exactly the same, the French law is really quite sophisticated in this respect and recognises that.
The fact that the only basic qualification is being a ski instructor is just the nature of any qualification system. There’s a bunch of things on my driving test I had to learn that I don’t use. More to the point, there’s well over half the stuff I had to do as an IML that I don’t use, the only time I’ve rescued a casualty from a hole was a when a large dog had fallen in one. I still had to know how to do it and I still have to practise.
As an IML I’m also aware that that mostly my technical training isn’t required, what’s required is a certain judgement and experience and the bar for that is quite high. So high in fact that once you’re operating at that level the technical skills aren’t challenging at all. From which I know that designing an award focussed on ski hosting isn’t practical, by the time you’d demonstrated the judgement required you’d have passed the skills bar to be an instructor. I also know that controlling an environment to guarantee those skills won’t be used is actually impossible.
davidof - 18 February 2013 11:27 PM
Hard to feel too passionate about this service to be honest but that’s just me. As a side issue the Ski Club do seem to have stopped leading off-piste but the Eagle Ski Club do, sometimes. I can’t see the harm in it myself, I’ve never heard of an accident involving a TO led group, I guess they happen but it doesn’t seem to be something cropping up in the headlines all the time. It would be interesting to know the ESF viewpoint.
They’re are quite a few incidents. If you mean ones where people lose their life then it’s fair to say there aren’t really. If we do it by notifiable incident it’s a different story. By notifiable that includes anything the lift company or pisteurs had to get their accident book out and record, anything that resulted in medical intervention or anything that subsequently resulted in an insurance claim. And of course anything the TO should have recorded if it was acting responsibly. These incidents run the usual course of ski injuries, broken limbs, twisting/falling injuries, sunstroke/dehydration, lost and so on. In the jargon, fairly highly occurrence with low to medium consequences.
Arguably that’s not really the point. There’s two ways we, as a society, can regulate outdoor activities, that’s reactively or proactively. In the UK it’s largely reactive, after incidents the Lyme Bay disaster or Glenridding Beck. The conclusions of the reports are long and detailed but the same themes emerge; things can go very wrong very quickly even during fairly tame activities and that unqualified staff invariably kill their charges sooner or later. You can wait until that happens and then put rules in place or you can anticipate the obvious problems and manage it proactively. From Lyme Bay we learnt we needed this regulation and from Glenridding Beck we confirmed what would happen if it wasn’t followed.
davidof - 18 February 2013 11:27 PM
That said, the law appears to be clear in France
Article L212-1 En savoir plus sur cet article…
I.-Seuls peuvent, contre rémunération, enseigner, animer ou encadrer une activité physique ou sportive ou entraîner ses pratiquants, à titre d’occupation principale ou secondaire, de façon habituelle, saisonnière ou occasionnelle, sous réserve des dispositions du quatrième alinéa du présent article et de l’article L. 212-2 du présent code, les titulaires d’un diplôme, titre à finalité professionnelle ou certificat de qualification :
You can’t teach or lead groups as part of your employment in any shape or form unless you have a recognized professional qualification. So Le Ski were clearly breaking French law, which of course may be superseded by European legislation but does not appear to have been raised by their defense lawyer who concentrated on the “teaching” aspect according to the Dauphine Libere article I read.
You’ve better access to legal knowledge than I’ve got but I’m fairly sure that’s not going to fly. France can define what qualification is required and under EU law provide mechanisms for equivalence, nothing more. Just because a job exists somewhere else doesn’t mean they’re obliged to define a path for it, just because you’re a saggar maker’s bottom knocker back home doesn’t mean the French are obliged under EU law to let you be one in Val d’Isere.
Peanutski.eu have stuck with this story but I find their tone to be very jingoistic.
Not half “British ski hosts banned by French court” isn’t really an accurate headline, it’s just inflammatory. More accurately, “one ski company, in a case that may later impact others of all nationalities, loses a case they were never going to win about actives that weren’t legal in any other country either and hoping that while making a fuss no one noticed the other laws that other companies might be breaking” although I accept that may need a sub-editor. Maybe, “French courts act to protect anyone that’s qualified for the activity they’re leading” is snappier.
France discriminates against no one holding the correct qualifications for the activity they’re leading. In fact it’s the reverse, if you’re a recognised professional there’s nothing other courtesy and respect from all parts of the community, from officials downwards.
a bloke on the internet -
I’m going to Austria instead, see how they like that
Well, you’re not are you? Maybe you will and you’ll book right after you’ve mopped the blood up from cutting your nose off to spite your face. But the majority aren’t. And they aren’t because you don’t really understand why you were going to France to start with. Not so long ago Austria had the biggest market share but two things happened. The exchange rate changed and the French went into overdrive to encourage foreign skiers to go there. The French turned a blind eye to the many and varied breaches of their employment, safety, catering and hospitality laws allowing the foreign companies to get away with flagrant abuse to keep their costs down. If you think Ginghams and Kristal can operate at the same margins in countries that do enforce their laws then you’re very wrong. And if you think it’s perfectly legal for unqualified teenager to take people skiing in other alpine countries then you’re in cloud cuckoo-clock land. If the large chalet companies could operate their model all over Switzerland or Austria they would be doing that already.
another bloke on the internet -
well I’ve got an anecdote about the time a French guy looked at me funny and I’ve got a BASI badge I took in a large fridge
not interested.
yet another bloke on the internet -
what will the van driver do when he’s not ski hosting?
I dunno, clean the fridge properly? Hoover under the bed? Volunteer at the local Sally Ally?
if you’re a recognised professional there’s nothing other courtesy and respect from all parts of the community, from officials downwards.
That’s not entirely true is it, there are many British ski schools who have great difficulty in France, with things ranging from the bureaucratic placement of meeting point flags in inhospitable places to the downright rude like peeing on those flags.
As someone who has gone through the French system as an IML and as a mountain bike guide, I am well aware of the illegality of looking after a group of people, for money, without the required qualification.
However, as someone involved in the tourist industry in the French mountains I think that this is a big mistake. The British tour operators bring a massive percentage of people to this region (I am sure someone can find the percentage out). There is a good possibility that they will start to move operations elsewhere as a result of this. This will have a negative effect on many businesses, hotels, chalets, restaurants, mountain leaders, as well as ski instructors, including the ESF who have practically sponsored this.
I think that they were wrong to go ahead with this without consultation with the other relevant bodies. There was no indication of this via the MCF or LESAEM, yet it is going to affect our business.
Given a heads up on this, and reasonable discussion among those involved I think that an equivalence for ‘ski guiding’ could have been developed that was not as hard or costly as becoming a full blown ski instructor. The French have done it in other areas, for walking and mountain biking for example.
if you’re a recognised professional there’s nothing other courtesy and respect from all parts of the community, from officials downwards.
That’s not entirely true is it, there are many British ski schools who have great difficulty in France, with things ranging from the bureaucratic placement of meeting point flags in inhospitable places to the downright rude like peeing on those flags.
It’s really confined to ski instructors though isn’t it? I And ESF do it to other French schools so while it’s hardly acceptable it’s maybe a different issue. I’ve also wondered if the many legitimate British ski school have their reputations damaged by the antics of some TO’s, I’ll bet a lot of them are cheering this.
Phil Ingle - 19 February 2013 09:30 AM
However, as someone involved in the tourist industry in the French mountains I think that this is a big mistake. The British tour operators bring a massive percentage of people to this region (I am sure someone can find the percentage out). There is a good possibility that they will start to move operations elsewhere as a result of this. This will have a negative effect on many businesses, hotels, chalets, restaurants, mountain leaders, as well as ski instructors, including the ESF who have practically sponsored this.
I just can’t see that. The operators will never hit the same price points in Austria or Switzerland. I’m not familiar enough with Italy to really know. Price is everything to that market. A large part of the market is self catering, there’s simply not the capacity outside of France so you can be sure that’s going nowhere. What’s the real take up of ski hosting? Even the Tea Club’s own figures say it’s not what it was. It could be the more experienced skiers are now seeking real guiding or technical instruction.
There’s no way these operators are going to rock up in a Swiss village, rent or buy a chalet, get proper work permits, pay proper wages with AVS contributions and so on and still charge 300 quid a week including flights and lift passes.
Phil Ingle - 19 February 2013 09:30 AM
Given a heads up on this, and reasonable discussion among those involved I think that an equivalence for ‘ski guiding’ could have been developed that was not as hard or costly as becoming a full blown ski instructor. The French have done it in other areas, for walking and mountain biking for example.
That had struck me, it’s very similar to mountain biking in some ways. There’s some indications there’s been attempts to talk with at least the Tea Club, I think I’d have left in frustration if all I’d got was a broken record that it’s not teaching and despaired they’d ever understand. And although it’s all simple enough for randonnee in France as a foreign IML there’s still problems with unqualified leaders in summer.
But is there really the interest? I’d guess you’re looking at IML + some basic BASI level so I’d be fine, I can think of other people operating private chalets who might find it useful and be qualified but we can’t number more than a few dozen people. If it’s a value add for your own operation then fair enough, I suppose I could take clients out when we’re not snowshoeing. But I’m hardly going to lead for Krystal for the rates they’re likely to pay nor would anyone else I suspect. So I can’t see anyone lobbying UIMLA to address this and they’d feel skiing was outside their remit in any guise I suspect. We’d never provide the numbers of leaders prepared to work at the rates and there’s no magic wand to turn a gap year student into a rounded leader. By the time you’re paying proper rates you can get an instructor anyway and you might as well teach offering a package in the style of UCPA or Club Med for example.
I really think the mass market isn’t going to notice, it’s all about price. And, no matter how annoyed some skiers might be, where exactly are they going to go that this allowed? I think all the other valid points made just look irrelevant when you pose that question.
This debate goes on on many other forums too. I have no sympathy for Crystal in this case at all. Various governing bodies provide courses and qualifications for “Group Leaders” to take customers around the piste. The Snowsport Scotland “Alpine Ski Leader (ASL)”, being one such example, that provides a licence for School Teachers or other youth leaders to escort their charges on the Piste and is common to other European awards. This involves a 7 day course plus First Aid and Safeguarding children modules. The European countries then agree either multi or bilaterally to recognise such qualifiactions and everything is hunky-dory. This is both good practice and common sense.
This of course involves an element of training (cost) and then paying those who are trained an appropriate wage (cost). Thus ruling out the usual “Ski Guiding” seasonaire (cheap)student! You can see why it is an unattractive option for tour companies. We Mountain Professionals should support the French position, as ultimately it is our business these companies take away. We must be reaching the point where at least one of the big tour operators can start marketing themselves as the company with “Qualified” ski guides. After all an extra 25-50 Euros per person for ski guiding is not a great deal in a budget of a couple of thousand!
The French will always be protectionist by nature (Level IV ISTD required to ski teach) but the other European nations do recognise the other International levels, IML, etc so go there instead.
This debate goes on on many other forums too. I have no sympathy for Crystal in this case at all. Various governing bodies provide courses and qualifications for “Group Leaders” to take customers around the piste. The Snowsport Scotland “Alpine Ski Leader (ASL)”, being one such example, that provides a licence for School Teachers or other youth leaders to escort their charges on the Piste and is common to other European awards. This involves a 7 day course plus First Aid and Safeguarding children modules. The European countries then agree either multi or bilaterally to recognise such qualifiactions and everything is hunky-dory. This is both good practice and common sense.
I’d be interested to know which European countries those are? Some schools and groups in the UK might require it for leaders taking groups to Europe but I think alpine countries literally wouldn’t recognise it.
You can however accompany a school group to France as a teacher if you want as they have a liberal and pragmatic approach to supervision. Mostly in order for their own educational groups to operate.
Italia - 19 February 2013 10:45 AM
After all an extra 25-50 Euros per person for ski guiding is not a great deal in a budget of a couple of thousand!
More like 50 and that’s per day based on groups of 8 or so. And a lot of the skiing public won’t pay it. There was a recent posting on another forum about a ski safari which sounded quite good, the consensus was it was double the cost the guys were prepared to pay and that was quite clearly because the placed a zero monetary value on the professional, off-piste guiding element. I don’t think it matters what we think about that or how muddled the thinking is, it is what it is. That’s wildly extrapolating from a couple of random comments but it looks a fair reflection of thinking to me
Italia - 19 February 2013 10:45 AM
The French will always be protectionist by nature (Level IV ISTD required to ski teach) but the other European nations do recognise the other International levels, IML, etc so go there instead.
France is currently the only country in the world to both require and recognise IML so that’s not really accurate for IML at least. It’s not fair to call the French protectionist in this regard unless you make the caveat that they are protectionist in regard to properly qualified and regulated professionals. And that really doesn’t look so very bad to me. No doubt the EU has been something of a liberalising force here. As far as I can tell, I’d need to be a lot better skier than I am to teach in France which looks fair enough to me.
There’s always an overshoot on qualifications, whether this is worse than other cases is debatable. Is there a shortage of ski instructors? Or are some sat on their hands for a lot of the season? Or back in class or behind the supermarket checkout out of high season? Regardless of the level the French set there I suspect the truth of it is that regardless of the level the only people making a real career are those who didn’t have too much trouble passing it. And that’s how it is for most qualifications which is why I’m not a ski teacher or guide
None of this is likely to make any difference to the numbers of people going to France in my opinion. I suspect we may look back and realise that ski-hosting has had it’s day anyway. In an age of fat skis with more interest in off-piste skiing even from the mass market, with modern skis increasing the confidence of skiers and a lot of skiers just getting more ski days per season I suspect a lot of people have outgrown this.
I think that they were wrong to go ahead with this without consultation with the other relevant bodies. There was no indication of this via the MCF or LESAEM, yet it is going to affect our business.
I don’t really see that Phil, it’s certainly not going to affect our summer/MTB business.
It will certainly affect the winter business though. How much remains to be seen.
Could you not just add it your carte pro Steve? If you’ve BASI + IML they might recognise that’s enough. My understanding is that people have added activities even where there’s no equivalence in place but they have appropriate qualifications.
This is for sure the wrong place to ask the question “so has anyone ever used a ski host” and the whole issue looks like a storm in a “ski boot”.
For a laugh I asked friends who ski socially one week a year if they had ever used a ski host, the universal response was never, or what’s one of those, and why would I want someone showing me round the resort its not hard to figure it out yourself.
I have to say that I was surprised when learning about the applicable French law regarding ski hosting. I presume this will therefore apply to taking people out for walks in the mountain during the summer. Actually it should probably also apply to hosts taking people walking (a form of ‘activité physique’ ) around towns (therefore if you own a chalet business in the French Alps beware NOT to show your guests around town (for example telling them where bars, ski rental shops, ski schools - although you would probably not show them that now anyway!, newsagents, etc are when they arrive.....). And this, I think, shows the absurdity of this case.
Not for one minute will anyone be banned from showing people around villages. Why? In my view this is exactly the same as taking people around ski slopes. Some will say “of course it is not, as accident happens when skiing and you need to know how to deal with it...”. Well accidents also often happen walking around villages - especially at around midnight! - and the way it is dealt with is by calling the emergency services. This is the same way an accident on the slopes should be dealt with.
I completly agree that hosting / guiding offpiste should not be allowed by hosts. I have a ‘friend’ who did a ski season 11 years ago in the French Alp and as part of his job he had to guide guests ON THE SLOPES for two days a week. Never did he go offpiste (even if requested/begged) as he knew it would engage his responsibility if anything went wrong. However, the guest (who ‘I have been told’ would NEVER have paid even EUR10 per day for the service) were glad, on the first couple of days of their holiday, not to have to open a piste map or find the vaguely decent restaurants.
Now I know certain French resorts rather well. I might, for fun, take a couple of weeks off work and, three days a week, go and sit in front the various ski schools with a placard saying “FREE ski guiding around the slopes, no remuneration required”. I would love to see what happens then.....anyone joining me?
adie: we run a chalet business based in a small resort. We therefore include a service where we take people to neighbouring larger resorts one or two days a week. If they want, we go along to show them around. It’s really popular with our clients, a deal-clincher for many.
adie: we run a chalet business based in a small resort. We therefore include a service where we take people to neighbouring larger resorts one or two days a week. If they want, we go along to show them around. It’s really popular with our clients, a deal-clincher for many.
but isn’t that only a problem if you’ve a competitor that ignores the rules? otherwise it’s a level playing field. Obviously this always a problem with the ski industry, you’re competing with people who aren’t quite following the rules and/or who’ve got staff that are basically paying for the privilege of working for them. Again, that’s why these companies aren’t pulling this model off on any scale outside France.
“British ski hosts banned by French court” isn’t really an accurate headline, it’s just inflammatory. More accurately, “one ski company, in a case that may later impact others of all nationalities, loses a case they were never going to win about actives that weren’t legal in any other country either and hoping that while making a fuss no one noticed the other laws that other companies might be breaking” although I accept that may need a sub-editor. Maybe, “French courts act to protect anyone that’s qualified for the activity they’re leading” is snappier.
and the whole issue looks like a storm in a “ski boot”.
