“Misguided” French Court Verdict in SCGB Case

I think everyone agrees that qualifications for ski instructors are imperfect. Does being an elite skier or climber made you a good low level instructor for beginners; certainly is not a pre-requisite. It also places huge barrier for those with disability or above a certain age.

However I am all for protecting the profession and the certainty that qualifications provide. French ski schools, which contain instructors from all over the world have a fantastic reputation. The reality is that hosting has to be eroding the potential client base and for that reason alone should be banned.

Ranchero. I couldn't disagree more. In my very limited experience of being "hosted", the host made it clear that he was not a teacher and that he was only showing you around the pistes, and actually referred people to the ski school.

Let me give you a simple example from my own experience.

Family ski holiday; kids are now outskiing parents limiting the holiday experience for: Two clear options exist:
1) Put kids in ski school
2) Use hosting service

Am sorry despite the guy being coached to say he is not an instructor he is still clearly removing revenue from the ski school in the above case. Whether the host is attempting to teach or not is not even part of the argument. When you set the bar so high as they do in France you then need to protect the investment ski instructors have made to attain level 3, hence is pure economics. No need in NZ, Canada etc. as 6-8 week course and you are good to go, hence comparing country vs. country is irrelevant.

Anyone know what was the legal 'argument' the French prosecution used to get the court to agree that the SCGB chap was "effectively" being paid ? - like, was he staying in accommodation provided free by SCGB or a resort, or have his expenses paid... or ...? (or - is there a French transcript or summary of the proceedings on the net, or a Civil Code section which establishes the issue?)

From my fairly limited 50 years experience of skiing, I agree with Dobby, and disagree with Ranchero, (who I much respect, but frequently, but normally mutely disagree with)

Just a couple of years back, I used the hosting service in Wengen. We used the service predominantly because moving around the Jungfrau area is a bit complex. By a wide margin, we were the most experienced and competent skiers in the group, including the hosts, but that was of no consequence to anyone.

When in a group, I routinely ski at the back. The hosts had a directional guide at the front, and two at the back, performing much the same activity as I do.

The hosts had a very clear understanding as to what was permitted, and who was allowed. I was really impressed how they carried out the mission, effectively, and politely, eliminating people who would not be able to keep up with the group. I did question them about wider situations, and the explanations indicated a clear strategy of capability control.

Note, I am not discussing SCGB, but a typical TO hosting. Legally, there seems to be not too much between the cases.

There is no case for protecting the "profession". I do not even agree with the proposition "profession". If I did, I would have to protect at least six or seven "professions" I have had. I have qualifications in engineering, law, marketing, systems technology, ski instructing, athletics coaching, and others. I also earned money folk singing and as an water colour artist. So what is my "profession"? The term is very limiting.

Just about every season, someone asks me to help them with their skiing. I always oblige, just glad to move someone on with their skiing capabilities. You know when you have moved them forwards when you hear the "WHOOP".

This about the utter joy of skiing, not about protecting "professions", French or otherwise.

Dave Mac wrote:Note, I am not discussing SCGB, but a typical TO hosting. Legally, there seems to be not too much between the cases.

I think this is the crux of the matter. The SCGB isn't really a club in the traditional sense anymore, it's a membership organisation comprising 3 companies; Ski Club Of Great Britain Ltd, Ski Club Services Ltd and Ski Club Winter Arrangements Ltd that employs 11 – 50 people depending on the time of year. They recently advertised for a Sales Executive "to drive sales of memberships, insurance and member holidays with the aim of aiding the Club to meet its ambitious membership and revenue targets" https://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/view/156572571?trk=biz-overview-job-post Ski clubs on the continent don't operate like this.

Article L.212-1 is pretty clear, teaching, leading and training people for remuneration is the preserve of qualified instructors. Remuneration is described as any compensation in money or in kind that amounts to more than the reimbursement of justified expenses. Both the lower and appeal courts found that the expenses that the club leaders receive are greater than justified. I don't think most outdoor club leaders receive travel, accommodation and living expenses.

Now that the UK is going to leave the EU I doubt that there is much point in pursuing these cases. When the UK leaves the TOs will probably have to establish companies in the EU and any UK citizen wishing to obtain seasonal work with them will likely have to obtain a work permit http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/LSU/?uri=CELEX:32014L0036 I doubt if these will be issued to ski hosts or instructors who don't have recognised qualifications.

People need to remember that you don't need to be French to work for ESF. Is nothing to do with preventing British people working. Is about applying a standard.

Have there been any cases brought to the Tribunals involving a hotel or rental property owner (i.e. not his paid employees) providing free hosting to visitors paying for accommodation? And same question, but as it might apply to organisers of friend-or-family groups using such accommodation?
My self-interest is that as a local resident, I also rent out my chalet in the Maurienne/3V, and offer free (and obviously not unlawful) 'off-snow' hosting, like briefings on pistes - and piste-stops! - and kit and and piste conduct advice for beginners. So I have to explain why (at present) I feel I could be at risk if I accompany them on-piste - which otherwise I would happily do for free - or at least, lunch! But am I being over-cautious?
Also btw - although irrelevant to hosting legality, a key Maurienne attraction is to 'ski-safari' in 6 or 12 resorts in as many days. But even with pre-briefings, that's less achievable without an on-piste host, and the ski-schools do not offer an economical multi-resort forfait (also, the regional discounted ski-pass is in limbo for staffing reasons - but that's another story I'm working on!)