Using the Uber model for ski instruction - Carve Ski Instructors

[Slim]

[QUOTE="Dave Marshak, post: 209006, member: 263" Slim said:
They would only be scabs if they were working for less than the resort instructors, and/or cutting corners on insurance“
]They are still using resort facilities. Why would I allow anyone to conduct any business (let alone compete with me) on my property without paying me rent? Would you?

dm[/QUOTE]

Umm, a scab is someone who undercuts (striking) workers, you are talking about competition to the employers position. In fact, it could be the opposite, since it offers a employees a competing employer, it’s almost the opposite of a scab.

 

[ScotsSkier]

[QUOTE="Dave Marshak, post: 209006, member: 263" Slim said:
They would only be scabs if they were working for less than the resort instructors, and/or cutting corners on insurance“
]They are still using resort facilities. Why would I allow anyone to conduct any business (let alone compete with me) on my property without paying me rent? Would you?

dm

Umm, a scab is someone who undercuts (striking) workers, you are talking about competition to the employers position. In fact, it could be the opposite, since it offers a employees a competing employer, it’s almost the opposite of a scab.[/QUOTE]

ummm, you do realize that if it takes business away from the mountain, the first thing the mountain does (apart from legal action) is lay off more instructors.....and assuming the new set up uses the Uber model, it does NOT offer instructors a new employer, they just become self-employed and then have to deal with the complexities of that....

 

[at_nyc]

ummm, you do realize that if it takes business away from the mountain, the first thing the mountain does (apart from legal action) is lay off more instructors.....and assuming the new set up uses the Uber model, it does NOT offer instructors a new employer, they just become self-employed and then have to deal with the complexities of that....

Any workers are at risk of being laid off if their employer mismanages the business and loses customers to their competitors.

Does that mean no one should compete with that business because it will eventually cause their employees to be laid off?

And if the laid off workers are forced to become “independent contractor”, having to deal with more complexity but for higher pay, is that a good thing or bad thing?

 

[ScotsSkier]

Any workers are at risk of being laid off if their employer mismanages the business and loses customers to their competitors.

Does that mean no one should compete with that business because it will eventually cause their employees to be laid off?

And if the laid off workers are forced to become “independent contractor”, having to deal with more complexity but for higher pay, is that a good thing or bad thing?

Nope, just pointing out the inherent contradiction in the previous statement where it assumed that they could switch from existing model but still be an employee. And it also highlights the apparent lack of understanding in so many of these threads about "instructors should be paid more" where there appears no understanding of taking on the challenges of being self employed/running their own business - and putting up investment/capital as required - as opposed to just wanting to be paid more without taking on the associated risks and still being an employee.......and of course that doesn't even consider the totally unsubstantiated assumptions that somehow there is a veritable dam of pent-up demand out there for lessons if only they were somehow cheaper............there seems to be a lot of delusion that somehow this community is a representative cross-section of the wider skiing population..... just saying...

 

[François Pugh]

And they would be completely justified if they did that, but the reality is that's not really possible, or at least it wouldn't be profitable. Did you know of any other restaurants that allow you to bring your own sandwich?

dm

I'm sure the resorts would do it if they could get away with it, but the skiers who buy the passes and the lift tickets won't let them get away with it. The best they can do is have some restaurants with no bagged lunches and relegate bagged lunches to a smaller crowded area.

The skiers won't stand for it because of tradition. They view the ski resort as a place to go skiing that may also sell food for those who want to buy it. I'm sure non-skiers see it as a restaurant with a view of a ski slope. Thank God for tradition.

 

[RuleMiHa]

Having recently been told that Vail instructors make $80-$160 for an all day private that Vail charges around $1000 for, my opinion is that the system currently sucks. I don't know what needs to happen but the status quo is really awful.

 

[at_nyc]

the previous statement where it assumed that they could switch from existing model but still be an employee
...
and of course that doesn't even consider the totally unsubstantiated assumptions that somehow there is a veritable dam of pent-up demand out there for lessons if only they were somehow cheaper.....

They could if there're employers willing to take on less profit in the hope of attracting more business volume. In fact, that happens in most other line of business. But not in ski instructor field because mountains don't allow outside company to operate on the mountain. And for that reason, I don't think the Uber model will work for ski instruction. But just for argument sake, it's quite possible to get paid more by joining a better run business in many profession besides ski instructor.

Until a mountain allows independent ski schools to operate on their trails, we will never know if there're "dam of pent-up demand for lessons if only they were cheaper", will we?

there appears no understanding of taking on the challenges of being self employed/running their own business - and putting up investment/capital as required -

What investment and capitals are we talking about?

(as for the "challenge of being self-employed", I'm not sure who's the one lacking understanding. I've met some of the people on this board, quite a few of them are running their own business/self-employed. There're challenges alright, but it's not rocket science either)

 

[Ken_R]

and of course that doesn't even consider the totally unsubstantiated assumptions that somehow there is a veritable dam of pent-up demand out there for lessons if only they were somehow cheaper............there seems to be a lot of delusion that somehow this community is a representative cross-section of the wider skiing population..... just saying...

That maybe true but speaking for myself, my wife and other family members we would DEFINITELY would take a bunch of lessons if they were substantially cheaper. I havent taken a lesson in a few years mainly because the price (here in Colorado) just dissuades me not to get more ski instruction.

I have been self-employed for 15 years so I know a little bit about being so, its not always easy but nothing is really.

 

[crgildart]

If the model does go live, and survives legal challenges.. instead of seeing instructors at large resorts laid off due to the competition taking business we're more likely to see instructors QUITTING to go take the higher paying gig.

 

[ScotsSkier]

Having recently been told that Vail instructors make $80-$160 for an all day private that Vail charges around $1000 for, my opinion is that the system currently sucks. I don't know what needs to happen but the status quo is really awful.

so...... if they had to do all their own advertising, fund all their overheads, insurance etc and find their own clients.......how many instructors do you think would still be in business??? If the resorts do so little for their money as opposed to the instructor, and it is so easy, seems strange that there has been no real serious efforts to set up an alternative....??? And is the situation much different from many consumer goods where the cost of advertising, distribution etc is more than 80% of the retail cost??

Q. (and this is not a trick question, I am totally serious)
How many instructors do you think would be prepared to buy a franchise, with a committed payment, to teach at a resort? I suspect there are areas that would be open to that. Suppose to put some metrics around it the "franchise payment" was say, $100/day /instructor (and would require a commitment to be 7days/wee service ), how many would take a deal like that? since remember there are not that many instructors billable 8 hrs/day/7 days/week but the area still requires to have enough available to meet demand, at least a proportion of which is "walk-in"

 

[François Pugh]

How many businesses operate with a labour charge out rate 10 times their pay rate? Three times is ok, but ten? Give me a break.

 

[ScotsSkier]

........

(as for the "challenge of being self-employed", I'm not sure who's the one lacking understanding. I've met some of the people on this board, quite a few of them are running their own business/self-employed. There're challenges alright, but it's not rocket science either)[/QUOTE

.

Cant talk to your understanding, but I have run my own Companies, on 2 continents, for 15+ years so I have a modicum of understanding... .....no, not rocket science, but just pointing out there a lot of costs, overheads and other factors (licensing etc) - not to mention finding customers and (trying) to ensure a forward workload that are conveniently ignored in these discussions ....

 

[ScotsSkier]

Francois, you are assuming that somehow the lesson rates are based on costs rather than on what people will pay... and of course the wages are based on what people will work for. There seems to be plenty of instructors willing to do it for existing levels.... and I guess I can't really talk since I would not be making a living based on what I get paid for coaching....

 

[François Pugh]

Francois, you are assuming that somehow the lesson rates are based on costs rather than on what people will pay... and of course the wages are based on what people will work for. There seems to be plenty of instructors willing to do it for existing levels.... and I guess I can't really talk since I would not be making a living based on what I get paid for coaching....

You, as a coach have my utmost respect and admiration. I see how hard the coaches work at my local speed bump. And it's not for the money!

As long as the resorts have a monopoly on instruction and people are willing to instruct for slave wages, the instructors can do nothing except move down the road and work for peanuts at the other resort. It's like the bank telling you if you don't like the service fees, switch banks.

 

[RuleMiHa]

so...... if they had to do all their own advertising, fund all their overheads, insurance etc and find their own clients.......how many instructors do you think would still be in business??? If the resorts do so little for their money as opposed to the instructor, and it is so easy, seems strange that there has been no real serious efforts to set up an alternative....??? And is the situation much different from many consumer goods where the cost of advertising, distribution etc is more than 80% of the retail cost??

Q. (and this is not a trick question, I am totally serious)
How many instructors do you think would be prepared to buy a franchise, with a committed payment, to teach at a resort? I suspect there are areas that would be open to that. Suppose to put some metrics around it the "franchise payment" was say, $100/day /instructor (and would require a commitment to be 7days/wee service ), how many would take a deal like that? since remember there are not that many instructors billable 8 hrs/day/7 days/week but the area still requires to have enough available to meet demand, at least a proportion of which is "walk-in"

As usual, things are more complicated than they seem! Oh to be 18 again where everything was simple, there was only one right answer, and I knew EVERYTHING!

 

[tball]

What investment and capitals are we talking about?

Little old Eldora just spent $6 million on a new lift:
https://theknow.denverpost.com/2017/11/24/eldora-new-improved-lift-base-experience/167784/

I routinely ride 30 and 40-year-old lifts that need to be replaced at some point.

 

[Blue Streak]

Francois, you are assuming that somehow the lesson rates are based on costs rather than on what people will pay... and of course the wages are based on what people will work for. There seems to be plenty of instructors willing to do it for existing levels.... and I guess I can't really talk since I would not be making a living based on what I get paid for coaching....

Don’t confuse people with economics.

This is a ruby slippers crowd.

 

[at_nyc]

I routinely ride 30 and 40-year-old lifts that need to be replaced at some point.

That's what lift ticket are for, riding lifts. You're endorsing making lesson takers subsidize non-lesson takers with their lesson fee?

If so, we all deserve to be hit by straight lining out of control skiers. We're subsidizing them for their lower lift ticket cost, rewarding them for NOT taking lessons.

 

[tball]

That's what lift ticket are for, riding lifts. You're endorsing making lesson takers subsidize non-lesson takers with their lesson fee?

If so, we all deserve to be hit by straight lining out of control skiers. We're subsidizing them for their lower lift ticket cost, rewarding them for NOT taking lessons.

Well, that's the way ski area business models currently work. Just like my season pass is subsidized by folks paying full rate at the window.

We should enforce rules about how ski areas operate? Also, have licenses to ski with mandatory lessons?

 

[at_nyc]

Cant talk to your understanding, but I have run my own Companies, on 2 continents, for 15+ years so I have a modicum of understanding... .....no, not rocket science, but just pointing out there a lot of costs, overheads and other factors (licensing etc) - not to mention finding customers and (trying) to ensure a forward workload that are conveniently ignored in these discussions ....

The majority of my professional career, I worked as an "independent contractor". So yes, I too, have some modicum of understanding. BTW, I could have avoided all that "challenge" by working as an employed for about 60% pay.

Finding customers: Easy in this case, the "Uber" website will provide the platform and visibility. That's in addition to the more traditional word-of-mouth. Let's face it, illegal cabs had existed all along, usually operating in airports. But Uber makes it possible to connect rider with drivers outside of airport. The same mechanism can work connecting skier instructors and skiers. (in my case, I worked for the same 2-3 agencies which found more work than I have time to do. I tell them I'm "off the market" when I want to take a long break -- like last winter)

Licensing: There's no such requirement at the moment. But one can join PSIA as a start.

Insurance: I don't know about ski instructing. But during my years as "independent contractors", Some of my clients REQUIRED professional insurance. Surprise, surprise, there're actually many offers out there. Just pick the one that suits!

Overhead: I have to buy my own suit. So the equivalent for ski instructors, they need to buy their own ski jacket, perhaps have their name on it as a moving advertisement?

Yes, there were other challenges. But they are relatively easy to overcome, provided the reward is sufficient.

The question is, will the ski instructors get 40% extra pay as "independent contractors"? Or only 20%? Or 200% extra pay?