French Alps MTB guiding row in the Telegraph

The UK recognises there are two ways of demonstrating competence – experience or qualifications. Ali appears to have both of these and yet the french refuse to accept this is enough. Protectionism is what I’m going with.

Well, there’s selctive quoting to suit Trail Addiction’s argument,

Show me where exactly.

French mountains are different to UK mountains, so a qualified UK guide won’t neccesarily have a clue about French mountains

Try telling that to any professional DH racer. you can’t possible know how to handle a bike on zis terrain because you’re English and know nuffin aboot our montanes

But it’s not a “mountain qualification” per se- the challenges that face a summer mtb guide in France are equivalent to those in Scotland or the UK. From that point of view, how is an alp different to a cairngorm?

Well with the lifts it is a heck of a lot easier to get yourself into trouble. The alps are massively different to anything in the uk for any number of reasons but that’s not the point. The point is, does the process you have to go through to get the qualification make it more or less impossible for someone not French to obtain it. I think they do structure it like this and I’ve heard many times from other guides in Switzerland and France that the policy while legal is blatantly not about safety and all about protectionism.

Show me where exactly.

Here:

*Definitions taken from EU Directive 2005/36/EC Article 3 points (a) and (e):

(a) ‘regulated profession’: a professional activity or group of professional activities, access to which, the pursuit of which, or one of the modes of pursuit of which is subject, directly or indirectly, by virtue of legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions to the possession of specific professional qualifications; in particular, the use of a professional title limited by legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions to holders of a given professional qualification shall constitute a mode of pursuit. Where the first sentence of this definition does not apply, a profession referred to in paragraph 2 shall be treated as a regulated profession;

(e) ‘regulated education and training’: any training which is specifically geared to the pursuit of a given profession and which comprises a course or courses complemented, where appropriate, by professional training, or probationary or professional practice.

Which excludes this:

(11)
In the case of the professions covered by the general system for the recognition of qualifications, hereinafter referred to as ‘the general system’, Member States should retain the right to lay down the minimum level of qualification required to ensure the quality of the services provided on their territory. However, pursuant to Articles 10, 39 and 43 of the Treaty, they should not require a national of a Member State to obtain qualifications, which they generally lay down only in terms of the diplomas awarded under their national educational system, where the person concerned has already obtained all or part of those qualifications in another Member State. As a result, it should be laid down that any host Member State in which a profession is regulated must take account of the qualifications obtained in another Member State and assess whether they correspond to those which it requires. The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest. Rules of this kind relate, for example, to organisation of the profession, professional standards, including those concerning ethics, and supervision and liability. Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.

Well, Im the unfortunate soul that has found himself at the centre of this row.

The first and most important thing to say – in case any trailAddiction customers are reading this – this whole thing is currently a political argument. We’re still offering a full guiding service and there is nothing to suggest that will change any time soon. In the event that the French manage to be successful in winning their point, the simple interim solution will be to hire in French qualified guides as official tail gunners, with the “real” trailaddiction guides still doing what they do best.

Of course everyone here is entitled to their opinion on wether I am doing the “right thing”. To pre-empt a few comments that I just know are coming soon…….I’d like to lay my cards on the table for anyone who cares to read them:

Yes indeed, I could chose to do one of three things to avoid this particular situation:

1) Retrain in France and obtain French qualifications, as suggested in this thread. I know that this is the route that one of my good friends and colleagues outside of trailAddiction, has chosen for himself recently. This would certainly solve the issue for myself once and for all. A nice stint back at uni would suit me quit nicely actually.

It would not solve the issue for many of my best guiding staff who I know really enjoy their job – and who are also VERY good at it. Some of them have more than 10,000 hours of guiding experience, all have at the very least, completed at least a full season of training with trailAddiction (in house). Unfortunately none of these guys have the time or money to commit to 2 years back at “French Guide University”, especially not to “learn” something that they already know.

So therefore, for the record, Im fighting this case for the sake of my company, its customers, and for the individuals that work for it at the moment, as much as I am for myself. When I see the huge smiles on the faces of my clients at the end of a week’s holiday with our guides, Im happy Im doing the right thing.

2) Sack the above mentioned staff and employ French qualified guides instead. I think its pretty obvious why I wouldn’t do that – its taken many years of training and development working with these great guys, to make them the top guides that they are today. My customers love working and riding with them, indeed they specifically request to be guided by them by name, year on year. Im not aware of any French guides (or ANY guides, of any nationality or qualification for that matter) that have the skills, patience, and personality of these guys – and that’s before we even start on trail knowledge. Remember that trailAddiction guides have been offering scoping this region since before the lifts were even open in the summer. I know for a fact that we ride some epic trails that never see tyre tracks from anyone else. All of this knowledge would disappear and take a long time to retrain, if we changed staff at this point – I don’t think that would be a good thing for our customers……

3) Go down the IML route as has been the solution of some other UK-qualified guides in the area. That is their choice, but again, personally I do not believe it is the right one for our customers. The IML is not a mountain bike specific qualification – far from it. I believe that the time invested in doing this kind of training would be much better invested in other things that will improve the experience of our customers – such as hunting out new routes and getting more and more high-alpine time on the bike (not on snow shoes and/or walking trips as is required by the IML). For the record, Im all for continual improvement and better staff training. Ive been working with British Cycling for example, on their new Level 3 qualification and am looking to line up re-training for all my guides on this new superb award – because the content is actually relevant and useful to what we do every day.

Anyhow, the main thing is, I don’t (or shouldn’t, at least) need to do any of this. The law is quite clear. Its all in black and white. One thing that most people do not know, is that EU law IS NOW EXACTLY THE SAME AS French law on this particular issue. I.e. in 2009, the French literally copy/pasted the entirety of EU Directive 2005/36 into their own written law.

Those who argue “just tow the French line, rather than argue against it” – are effectively arguing that France and/or Britain should not be part of the EU. That is a whole separate discussion that I don’t want to get into! But at the moment, both nations are very much IN the EU, and therefore have both openly and actively signed up to the rules that bind the EU together – one of the fundamental principals being the Freedom of Movement of Professionals. Of course, its not just as simple as that but the key points of argument in France’s defence seem to be:

1) French guides are better qualified and trained than UK ones.
This is categorically not true – as found by an independent panel a long time ago, that compared all national qualifications of al professions. As it happens, MBLA MBL was found to be one level higher than the French Brevet d’Etat national guiding qualification.

2) France has the right to set its own standards: Er, no it doesn’t, not as long as its still in the EU (see above).

One last thing to bear in mind – you’ll undoubtedly read comments from those who support the French system and their right to maintain high standards. In considering these arguments to make your own judgement – ask yourself – are these people arguing “from the inside” e.g. because they’ve done it themselves, and now have got the stamp of approval from the French? If so, are they really arguing for higher standards, or are they arguing to protect their own jobs from “outside competition”? If the former – then what have they got to worry about, and why do they care? If they really are better qualified and therefore better able to offer a professional service, then surely the customer will go with them anyway and the quality of service (and safety record) will give them all the business they need?

Over to you stoffel I believe – sounds like TA have their house in order..

BY the way, to address the initial post about being a martyr and going to jail – There’s no way in a million years Im ever going to jail over this! That is just typical sensationalist reporting at its best. The comparison to the Simon Butler case is not directly relevant. His huge fine and deferred prison sentence (which means he doesn’t actually go to jail at all by the way) was for defying a prior court order – a totally separate crime entirely. In my case, the worst we’ve ever had is a few sternly worded letters from French administration (not legally enforceable). Classic French bully tactics designed to make people bend over and simply give up…….or tow the French line.

When I say French line by the way, this is only the line of the heavily Union-influenced Department of Sport, on a national level. The position of every Frenchman I know in the valley – including the Mayor, the MCF (official french MTB school), the tourist office local businesses, the lift company and the lifties, etc etc is that we are very much welcome as we are, thank you!

And on that note, I should really get back to the much more important business of looking after my customers and finishing the planning and paperwork for this years Trans-Savoie!

In case you missed it in the previous links posted by others – here’s what I just said before, again, but with the legal points explained in more detail.

Legal Battle – the Right to Work in France as a UK-qualified Mountain Bike Guide

Who said being a mountain bike guide was supposed to be about riding bikes, by the way?

Protectionism pure and simple by the French and in breach of European law. It’s a try on by the local authorities who expect to intimidate the little guys who won’t have the money to pursue this to the European courts.

For those saying why not get the qualifications they take years, are examined only in French and are very expensive (the Frnech do them with local authority grants which the Brits will not be able to get). They are also very generic and not really mtb related.

They did the same with skiing and to be honest once they stopped chalet staff guiding many years ago I started going elsewhere.

Just a thought ?

Why can’t you employ some one to head up the company that will surely give you the rubber stamp over and above what you need, of course that will mean that there is some one up top who looks like he’s running the shop but quite a few company’s employ this tactic.

I’d say an ex Squaddie with several winters experience inside the arctic circle as a Mountain Leader, a jungle warfare instructor and a highly trained combat medic ? some one who has taught at an infantry training school such as Sandhurst and also taught at adventure training in Canada, The Apls, Norway, Brecon, Scotland, lakes etc would have the correct criteria ? Preferable Ex SF ! The French won’t like that.
Some of the military instructors quals are ranked quite high and are transferable in Civvy Street, but prob not in France ? But that’s where there may be some cross fertilisation as all the military stuff will be documented to the hilt and backed up by years of training and instruction.

He can take all the shit, maybe shuffle some paper and polish some bikes, you can then crack on with running the company and concentrating on the important stuff.

Just a thought,

Am I missing something? Just do the French course.

Yep I’m with Option 3, do a course that they will recognise. If you want to prove the point then take it through the courts but don’t risk being shut down over it.

He said: “I have quite clearly been forbidden from working, but I am continuing to do so because I believe that the French authorities do not have the right to do this. They should recognise my diploma. I have clients who have booked holidays and I’m I think I am being pursued because I am the most successful mountain biking business in the region.

I see your points and applaud you for taking on the system but if I was booking a holiday with you I’d be asking the following questions –
Are there any implications for my insurance?
What happens if the guide is stopped/arrested?
What (if any) are the implications for me paying for services that you are banned form offering?
Will you refund if your guides can’t guide/days are lost?

Unfortunately people go on holiday to get away from a lot of stuff like this. It’s not the most relaxing thought to be caught up in a locals vs foreigners dispute when all people want to do is ride their bikes.

The one thing that the French seem able to do, that others fail at – is to present a common-front.

When the first flood of decent quality electronics (video recorders) started coming in from the Far East the French could see that this would really hurt their local manufacturing, so what they did was regulate that all imports (of certain electronics) had to come through a single port-of-entry.

Of course this was a little port with part-time customs; consequently it meant that there was only a trickle of imports and the local manufacturers had ‘breathing’ space to do something about it. No idea whether they did or not.

The French are surely trying to make this a profession not just a ‘minimum waged’ summer job for kids for a year or two. Employ french qualified well paid guides/instructor pass cost on or take a cut in profits

Really important points there Mike, thanks for bringing them up:

Are there any implications for my insurance?

Of course you’d need to ask your own provider to be sure, but one we recommend is Carte Neige – a French insurance. Its not relevant if you are with a guide or not, to be covered. So in the worst case scenario they would treat you as “not with a guide” – e.g. fully covered. trailAddiction also has a very comprehensive company / employee liability insurance policy that covers all employees (guides!) whilst at work and this has been granted on the basis of our UK qualifications.
Remember, again, that the law says that we are fully legal – the French are the ones breaking the rules here by misapplying those rules.

What happens if the guide is stopped/arrested?

We show our UK guiding qualifications, the Gendarmes thank us and leave. Later that week, I am contacted personally to go down to the police station to explain why we don’t have French qualifications. (Still!).
This is exactly what happens and has happened several times already. Its all a show to try to intimidate, and it usually it works – as demonstrated by your very question! In fact, the Gendarmes only have the power to make a “control”, e.g. demand to see your papers. They don’t have the power to do anything else without a court injunction.

In the case of Simon Butler in Megeve for example, when the Gendarmes did finally rock up and make arrests – this was after 5 or 6 court appearances and court rulings that he had repeatedly ignored. (For the record, I commend him for this – but he’s a bigger man than me!). No such ruling is in place (or even in the pipeline yet) against trailAddiction or its staff.

What (if any) are the implications for me paying for services that you are banned form offering?

We’re not banned by law – even French law. Only in a letter from a pen-pusher at the Prefecture. A court ruling is required to make that a fully legal stance.

Will you refund if your guides can’t guide/days are lost?

For all the reasons above, this will not happen. Personally speaking, in this case, I would still find a refund unacceptable – getting your money back after already having your holiday spoiled, would be little compensation for the fact. However hypothetically, yes of course you would!

To demonstrate the point – I take our commitment to deliver very seriously indeed. We recently (the first time in 13 years) accidentally left the airport without collecting one of our customers who had flown in. The mistake was soon picked up of course, but the minibus was already en route to Les Arcs (with other customers in it). Rather than instruct the minibus to turn around and go back – thereby delaying the customers already in it – I instructed the customer at the airport to jump straight into a taxi. The bill was 340 Euros which of course we paid, gladly and apologetically.

The timing of all this is carefully planned. I already have the appointment down at the Gendarmes to formally “address/respond” to the latest letter that bans us from guiding. This is after the end of our season – at the agreement of the head Gendarme himself who is rather apologetic about the whole affair. Meanwhile, nothing else happens.

This gives us plenty of time to sort things out in court ahead of next season without impacting our customers.

In the event that we lose in court and an injection is put in place – of course – other provisions would be made (reluctantly!). These provisions include taking the French qualification, (as soon as you merely start the course, you are legally allowed to guide. Talk about a farse!) or employing the minimum number of French qualified guides in addition to my current staff, to act as the official group instructors, leaving my own guides free to continue to work as they do today in a “supporting” role of the French leader.

For the record, the reason Ive done none of this already is simply due to legal advice by my advisors. Doing any of this will merely weaken my case in court – since it indirectly accepts the ruling by the French that I am currently under qualified. For everyone that rolls over on this under pressure, the French strengthen their position. This is one reason why this whole affair has dragged on for so many years!

Am I missing something? Just do the French course.

@hora, read the thread. The course isn’t necessary under EU and thus French law, the courses required are general and a lot of it is a waste of time. Taking the courses would take a number of years (2) and are very expensive.

Employ french qualified well paid guides/instructor pass cost on or take a cut in profits

I strongly suspect the cost of the courses would far exceed Trail Addictions profits. French companies don;t offer the type of all inclusive and guided holidays that TA do as the French won’t pay. It would be totally un-economic to hire such guides and pass the cost on. If you tried al the guests would just go to, say, Spain or Switzerland instead. As I posted the French did exactly the same ting with ski guides / hosts and it achieved nothing, no more business for their local guides.

The course isn’t necessary under EU and thus French law, the courses required are general and a lot of it is a waste of time. Taking the courses would take a number of years (2) and are very expensive.

It is claimed that the courses are not needed under EU law, but the argument isn’t particularly convincing.

hora – Member
Am I missing something? Just do the French course.

Yes, hora, as usual, you are. You could read the thread, including the bit only a few posts above yours where the guy in question addresses that exact question.

Taking the courses would take a number of years (2) and are very expensive.

or do this one.
http://www.mountain-training.org/walking/skills-and-awards/international-mountain-leader
With a syllabus

International Mountain Leaders should be competent in the following key areas, all of which will be covered, to a greater or lesser extent, during both five day training courses.
The mountain environment
An overview of the legal and economic situation in countries in which IML award holders work
Group management and the responsibilities of the group leader
Teaching
Anatomy and physiology
Physical ability
Navigation
Weather
Security in mountainous terrain
Emergency procedures
Bivouac and survival skills
Expeditions
Snow-covered terrain

All of those skills with the possible exception of Snow Covered terrain are skills I would expect any guides to have. It covers the transition from the UK based bike environment to the high mountain skills required especially if your doing back country and multi day trips.

I don’t think you can compare this situation to the ban on ski hosting. Ski hosts held no qualifications while Trail Addiction hold what they feel are legally equivilent or better qualifications than the French qualifications and that the French authorities are willfully ignoring European law.

The write up on the front page is fantastic, great to see the views of so many of the guiding/hosting companies on offer. I’m with Sam from Bike Village on this. What’s the point in spending a lot of time and money on an IML when it covers a lot of ground which isn’t relevant to mountain biking and when the SMBLA award is rated higher than the French requirement. I hope he’s successful in his application, it would set a precedent and help clear up the situation for everyone else a bit.

http://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/guiding-in-france-war-in-the-mountains/

And there’s more to come….

Is there not something ironic about using the torygraph to highlight a case about the EU laws allowing people to work where they like across Europe?

What’s the point in spending a lot of time and money on an IML when it covers a lot of ground which isn’t relevant to mountain biking

From the list I quoted above about the syllabus for the IML course whats not relevant to (bike)guiding in a high alpine region? Snow is the only potential one and it’s easy to find that early season in the alps.

From the list I quoted above about the syllabus for the IML course whats not relevant to (bike)guiding in a high alpine region? Snow is the only potential one and it’s easy to find that early season in the alps.

I’ve not researched it apart from the comments in the article on the front page from people who have, but I assume there’s a lot of cross over with the mountain bike specific qualifications, the extra stuff is stuff about rope work and doesnt touch on bikes at all.

mikewsmith – Member

From the list I quoted above about the syllabus for the IML course whats not relevant to (bike)guiding in a high alpine region? Snow is the only potential one and it’s easy to find that early season in the alps.

That list is so general it’s impossible to say what’s useful and what’s not, and which of the useful things isn’t covered to the same or a higher level by SMBLA or others.

It would not solve the issue for many of my best guiding staff who I know really enjoy their job – and who are also VERY good at it. Some of them have more than 10,000 hours of guiding experience, all have at the very least, completed at least a full season of training with trailAddiction (in house). Unfortunately none of these guys have the time or money to commit to 2 years back at “French Guide University”, especially not to “learn” something that they already know.

So you pay the 60€ fee for the uni for each of them, they only show at the exam, pass them with obviously flying colours and solve your problem.

“For the French guys it’s their livelihood and they need to make a living out of it. British guys doing it as a gap year or a holiday job don’t care if they are being paid very little or even nothing at all. It puts a few noses out of joint.”

That is tough shit. It’s the EU and it’s happened and does happen a lot.
Fair play to Sam Morris.

Another question how much per hour do you pay your staff?

So you pay the 60€ fee for the uni for each of them, they only show at the exam, pass them with obviously flying colours and solve your problem.

@juan the exams are in French, I suspect for most guides a written exam paper in French would be a struggle. I also strongly suspect registering for the course would be far more difficult than just filling a form in and paying 60 euros

Another question how much per hour do you pay your staff?

Oh no, not this again. TA staff get full board and lodging – you need to factor that in.

Cant you change the wording of the activities ?

Charge the clients for food, accomodation etc… but tell the clients that someone ( current guide ) very familiar with the area will join them on their ride . and give your guides different
jobs title, cook , housekeeper etc…

@juan the exams are in French, I suspect for most guides a written exam paper in French would be a struggle. I also strongly suspect registering for the course would be far more difficult than just filling a form in and paying 60 euros

You mean that the French authorities expect guides trusted with the safety of their clients in the French mountains, to be able to speak French, well the bastards that is obviously a totally unreasonable expectation 🙄

You mean that the French authorities expect guides trusted with the safety of their clients in the French mountains, to be able to speak French, well the bastards that is obviously a totally unreasonable expectation

I have a doctor who barely speaks a word of english. Should he be sacked?

I have a doctor who barely speaks a word of english. Should he be sacked?

The british government and probably the Torygraph were campaigning to have the English Language test reinstated for foreign doctors to avoid problems such as not being able to communicate in an emergency situation (like calling for an ambulance) which is the sort of situation a bike guide could find themselves in.

The british government and probably the Torygraph were campaigning to have the English Language test reinstated for foreign doctors to avoid problems such as not being able to communicate in an emergency situation

Did it get reinstated? My experience suggests not.

No, but they wanted to, qualifications or not they wanted something more. In many ways a language test should be a valid extra requirement for work in certain fields.

Yup- but then capability in language takes many forms, a guide could easily have a good enough command of french to deal with any emergency situation, but that doesn’t mean they’re able to deal with an exam situation- it’s pretty different usage, especially with formal or technical language.

(I deal with this at work, we use a formal academic english qualification because normal conversational english-as-a-foreign-language just doesn’t cut it)

No, but they wanted to, qualifications or not they wanted something more. In many ways a language test should be a valid extra requirement for work in certain fields.

A little irrelevant (but a good idea non the less). A more accurate comparison would be if the UK didn’t recognise foreign medical degrees and insisted that people without british degrees go to a UK uni, study all over again and get their UK degree.

Places like factories, kitchens and building sites are very dangerous and people should be able to make emergency calls, right?

@MSP, @NorthWind has your answer.