Ski Leading/Guiding on piste in my opinion requires the assesment of group ability against knowlege of the area and suitable conditions for maximum enjoyment. There are good ski hosts and bad ones as there are instructors and guides. There are no easy answers as far as I am concerned but there is a big market and the TO’s will look at it carefully. I have not seen ny reports of the incidence of accidents in TO groups but know personally tat in the early 80’ Neilsons ski guides in Meribel were all BASI Qualified from trainer level down and paid appropritely. That now seems to be different with TO’s looking simply for a cheap option. The recent decision now makes this impossible s the TO’s will not pay the rate for someone qualfied in france. This problem will not exist elsewhere
One question for you all. I learnt to ski over 3 weeks, one per year from 1995. Was so much fun, 3 weeks of dry slope lessons in the UK, then a week of 2 hours in the morning, and 2 hours in the afternoon with the ESF in La Plagne (who were awesome). These were school trips. In between the lesson blocks, over lunch, the teachers would take groups of kids skiing if they wanted. The teachers were of differing abilities and experience, and skiing with them was great. I learnt a lot and had a lot of fun.
Is this outlawed now too? Has it always been?
I spent a couple of hours looking into this and couldn’t find the answer. Surely a teacher is being paid so would seem to fall foul of the law. The information given out by the French LEAs (Academies) says they should try and use the ESF (they always say ESF rather than qualified ski teacher as if the ESF is the only choice) but they can accompany kids with approval from the LEA.
My son’s school has stopped downhill skiing as have most of the schools in the valley. The teachers don’t want the responsibility if something goes wrong. However the mountain schools still spend a lot of time skiing - sometimes they knock of school at 3pm and sometimes it is over lunch.
I also read that UK teachers could accompany their children on the slopes but had to let the resort know of their plans in advance.
YES British school teachers can LEAD in France but only if they don’t teach. There have been police lead court cases after accidents and jail sentences as result. The French don’t treat their own any differently than the Brits.... The Brit regulations depend on the school and/or the local education authority.
The difference in legal / payment terms - it is about education or a club, and therefore not a commercial activity. SCGB in it’s Fresh Tracks guise would be probably seen as a commercial activity but on it’s own as a club, like so many in France. The difference in many people’s view is the VERY controversial off piste element in their “qualification”.
Things have changed I know, but I still have real reservations about the competence of someone with 2 weeks training to take people off piste. ( OR 3 OR 4 or more!) In my view it needs meaningful training and an exam plus logged experience.
So far as notification goes, (of the school or club’s activity), it is a politeness. Even if the local tourist office says please, you are welcome, they do not have the power to give permission to break French law.
Here is the point: ski guiding where the clients are paying, (whether within or without of their overall holiday fee) is against he law - whether the activity is popular or not.
Regarding responsibility - safe and responsible is ALWAYS better, until there is an accident that falls under the remit of a law prohibiting the activity. I know it’s a bastard, but that applies anywhere in the world.
Just as an aside, Snow Coach Guides (Club Cantabrica) recently stopped ski guiding as a result of the recent court case. (After 20 years of breaking French law) Their Boss wants them to continue. Really - I ask you- who is being exploited?
Teachers in the local valley (in France) do sometimes do not want to ski or run skiing activities - they claim responsibility issues - or is it sheer incompetence and laziness? After all with coach trips etc they have to work longer hours!
Our local teachers are great, but from further afield - questionable!
Well there we are, we think now, (perhaps) we know the law. What we need to do now is decide what to do with it!
Watch the Blizzard of Aaahs again - the comments at the start about how American resorts have sold out to insurance companies and lawyers are very telling.
That’s just silly. I can’t understand the British obsession with trying to demonise any sort of health and safety, I hope they choke on their horse cottage pies while being cared for by whoever would do it cheapest.
It’s France, you can go where you want and do what you want. If you rock up and announce you’ve special needs and can’t find your way around a heavily signposted hill with a map then there’s some rules to make sure you get the support you need.
Saint - 24 February 2013 10:14 PM
3 or 4 things,
YES British school teachers can LEAD in France but only if they don’t teach. There have been police lead court cases after accidents and jail sentences as result. The French don’t treat their own any differently than the Brits.... The Brit regulations depend on the school and/or the local education authority.
The difference in legal / payment terms - it is about education or a club, and therefore not a commercial activity. SCGB in it’s Fresh Tracks guise would be probably seen as a commercial activity but on it’s own as a club, like so many in France. The difference in many people’s view is the VERY controversial off piste element in their “qualification”.
Is it a club though? I’m confused by this. What exactly is the difference between the SCGB and a newly formed Crystal Frequent Traveller Ski Club?
It’s not like so many in France at all. There’s no regular club meeting these members go to, they didn’t travel there together either from downtown Lyon in a coach or on a charter, they’re not staying together in the same place and so on. I’ve no idea what real legal tests there are to be a club but just sticking the word on the end can’t be it.
And, like I asked, is that their argument? That they’re a club or that it’s volunteers?
davidof - 24 February 2013 09:09 PM
The information given out by the French LEAs (Academies) says they should try and use the ESF (they always say ESF rather than qualified ski teacher as if the ESF is the only choice)
to be fair, they may have other safeguarding criteria that the ESF meet and are audited on that another school won’t automatically have.
Overall I take the mountain leader’s comments above, and having just worked as an unqualified ski ‘explorer’ for this season until now, I think that if you’re a sensible and responsible person, plus an experienced skier with common sense, it’s easy and safe to guide groups around - their personal sat nav for the week - without any significant risk through your actions.
Sorry, I’m sure you’re a genuine guy doing this responsibly but this is the issue in a nutshell and why this debate is so bizarre.
When charged with illegal leading Le Ski demonstrate they’ve not understood with a defence that it’s not teaching.
When faced with the statement that unqualified and inexperienced leaders don’t understand the risks of the situation they’re in both the leaders and the consumers of the service respond that they can’t even conceive of those risks existing. It does rather prove the point. SCGB leaders at least can reasonably say they’ve met a standard.
SCGB have a club house (in London) they meet regularly in the regions, they are a club in most senses of the word. They are (OK except in my view about Fresh Tracks) a very traditional club.
So is there a real problem if they want to lead their own members around a hill if it fits in with French law? (I still don’t like the off piste bit but Club Alpin Francais do it) - Legally I think. (Davidoff will know all the ins and outs of that)
I don’t like particularly the style of club SCGB is, but club it is. Crystal frequent travelers and Fresh tracks are different, since for me they are commercial enterprises making commercial offers to all the world.
Much as may want to I cannot deny SCGB is to all extents and purposes as it exists for it’s members, a club.
In that case, they’re in trouble. The majority of the 30k members aren’t going to the clubhouse and aren’t going to any UK events. A lot of people join for Freshtracks or the guiding, in fact many just for the member discounts. Plus, you can turn up on day, take the guiding and join (or not) later.
There’s simply no comparison with CAF, CAS, DAV etc in terms of the way the club is run. It could be that ESF are quite happy with the the Ski Club but the ESF aren’t the ones making or enforcing the law. They’re also not just a single organisation, I can’t see why a local director might not decide he doesn’t want the Ski Club and make a complaint. If the Ski Club position is that a bloke from the ESF gave them the nod then I think they need a plan B.
A query from presently active Ski Club leader, have any of those with strong opinions about Ski Club activities, ‘bona fide’ club status etc been a member or indeed signed up for a free taster day to ski with a Leader?
I suspect there is a fair degree of presumption going on which might be debunked (or vindicated) by some participation.
You would at least then have a better informed opinion.
I don’t know whether I have a “strong opinion” about the Ski Club but I spent a season skiing and touring with various leaders in Switzerland although my experience is a bit out of date being over a decade ago now in this case. All were good skiers but all from a very very middle class mould. They generally seemed pretty competent but some seemed to be more on a ski holiday than there to guide skiers around the place. I can’t blame them for that, in any organisation you get a cross section from the highly committed to slackers. Although maybe not that slack as all that as they had recruitment targets and there seemed to be some pressure to get people signed up.
I subsequently did a training course with another SC leader who was very professional and younger and probably more in the demographic of UK skiers. More recently I skied with a leader who called himself “Ace” who repped in Flaine. Very well led day out and he was very good at guiding his group around the area in poor weather.
A query from presently active Ski Club leader, have any of those with strong opinions about Ski Club activities, ‘bona fide’ club status etc been a member or indeed signed up for a free taster day to ski with a Leader?
I suspect there is a fair degree of presumption going on which might be debunked (or vindicated) by some participation.
You would at least then have a better informed opinion.
That doesn’t really hold any water. To be quite honest, I don’t care what members of the Ski Club get up to and I’m not very interested in how good or otherwise the training for leaders is. I’m not in the target membership group really.
I’m just curious on what basis they think it can proceed and whether it’s sustainable. I could go out with them tomorrow and have an excellent, awful or indifferent day and it won’t alter the law or whether the ski club position is water tight or not. Whether it’s fun and safe, or not, isn’t really the issue.
Is the defence that they’re volunteers? Or, that they’re a club? Or both? It’s clear that defining either is pretty difficult. Is there 500 pages of legal opinion or is it a guess? I’m sure you don’t know personally and can’t answer officially but I think you’re confusing the issue if you conflate it with the quality of the offering.
There’s a guy on another forum claiming as he’s running a chalet and not paying himself specifically to be ski host that he’s found a loophole even though he’s advertising ski hosting on his website. He’s obviously wrong, but exactly where is the difference? Is it you ask the ESF and they tell you? That’s what the Ski Club seem to be saying and the ESF aren’t in charge of that at all.
But, yes, I was a member once and I don’t recall if I have used the guiding service or not.
On a similar note to all this ‘ski hosting’ stuff I wonder how some mountain bike company’s like Trail Addiction in les Arc and Singletrack Safari still operate guided holdiays in France without using IML’s or Professional French coaches. If a guest on these holdiays had an accident then the guide and company would be in serious trouble, no?
SteveoMcD, Jamie Carr, Gareth J, etc must get very confused by it all.
OliC - I’m reading with interest. I came out here as a Ski Host (13 years ago), I’m pleased to see the company I was working for has pulled their guiding service on the back of this ruling. I have also heard that in my local resort certain companies are carrying on regardless using the flawed theory that their employees are not being paid for ski hosting or believe it or not “we are only leading, not instructing” - they obviously can’t or don’t read French or English. As someone that has been through the mill with the authorities, I asked legal advice about fighting my case but both advocat I spoke to said “your grievance is with the EU not the French, in France it’s clear. You are breaking the law”. So I played the game and got qualified! And changed my business model to suit. Trouble is most of the rest of the industry didn’t!
Sorry, no. It was the same piece of legislation but it was being applied to Mountain Bike guiding. I sorted out my MTB qualifications here and am now properly registered as a Mountain Bike Guide.
On a similar note to all this ‘ski hosting’ stuff I wonder how some mountain bike company’s like Trail Addiction in les Arc and Singletrack Safari still operate guided holdiays in France without using IML’s or Professional French coaches. If a guest on these holdiays had an accident then the guide and company would be in serious trouble, no?
SteveoMcD, Jamie Carr, Gareth J, etc must get very confused by it all.
Good question. What’s actually changed though? Those summer activities, and there’s some pure randonnee as well, are under the same laws. Is there any reason to suppose it’s part of a wider crackdown? I guess we’ll have to wait until the summer.
Summer or winter, is there any reason to think other companies were going to be prosecuted? I find it hard to see the authorities would have been bothered personally. But the TO’s have folded really quickly, it’s absolutely not because they’ve only just learned their activity was illegal, they knew that all along. As they must know for the other alpine countries where they’re also breaking similar laws. I really doubt they’ve all taken similar action regarding the missing social contributions and not paying the minimum wage. So why on earth didn’t they carry on regardless as they have been doing for years? My guess is that underpaying the staff is more important to their business model than ski hosting and that’s what they want to carry on doing.
If it only takes one prosecution to get most of an industry to stop breaking the law then HopeFully they’ll find someone to prosecute in the summer.
Ise et al (actually, may have been Damato...)
my understanding (as a normal member, albeit an auditor, who therefore has a tendency to read small print), is that SCGB’s defence is that it’s guides are volunteers, not remunerated… and also, as mentioned earlier, taking the approach of waiting to be challenged. the principle of waiting for law to be enforced, for it to be defined, is not new.... (but not without risk!)
my personal view is that they may fall foul of the ruling, which would be a shame.
As to whether they are a ‘club’, at least in english law, that is driven by the legal documents which describe the organisations, its constitution and memoranda. I haven’t read these, but I’d guess they talk of ‘forming a social group to encourage uptake of winter sports in the British Isles’ or something similar, and possibly haven’t been updated since 18xx or whenever the club was formed.... and may thus bear little relationship to how the club appears to the outside world. (Freshtracks, as a TO, is clearly in a different space… which is probably why they regularly pay for Guides for certain holidays).
i would expect the club could mount a successful legal defence of their status as a club.... but that may not be enough to get out of a charge of ‘you were leading, and remunerating’.
No-one has mentioned the ‘ski hosting’ service offered in North American resorts - whilst they have a different approach to ‘in bounds’ v off piste, a model of ‘free’ on piste ‘leading’ seems to work quite well over there… I believe remuneration is in the form of a season pass in return for X sessions. Any resort which picks up on this could be onto a winner… who knows, maybe they’d even dispense tissue and maps at lift stations, or even manage the queues when it gets busy (but I digress).
I wonder what _really_ prompted the attack on the TO’s _this_ year, after 9 years of relatively peaceful ignoring of the rules.... was it a distracting technique? for what?
(oh, and none of this is intended as a specific dig at the French, nor is it intended as a put-down. I don’t post here often, but I do read frequently, and I’ve no wish to offend anyone!
I don’t have a negative or positive view of them *
