Are Private Lessons Legal?

[Atom Ant]

I have been looking into providing private lessons at a local hill during work-week evenings and am trying to determine if this is allowed or not on my own before resorting to calling the hill and straight up asking. My instincts tell me that their default answer will be "no", however I am not sure that answer will be reflective of the true answer, but rather just their preference.

For clarity, I am talking about providing non-affiliated snowboard lessons on a ski resort. The resort would have nothing to do with the lessons at all, and collect no money from them. All students would obviously have to buy a lift ticket, and rent equipment if needed from the resort but aside from this the resort would have no involvement whatsoever.

My thinking is twofold: 1) everyday people teach their friends how to ski or ride, either informally but oft times formally and the resorts never pull them aside and say, "you need to pay for a official lesson through us if your going to be learning in this fashion". 2) its in the resort's interest, in a way, to not stop private non affiliated lessons from occurring as the more students the private instructor acquires the more season passes/tickets sales or equipment rentals the resort profits from. The market for private lessons is likely a down-market vs. the one the resort mostly sells lessons to itself, due to the less expensive nature of a private non affiliated lesson (the resort offers private lessons as well, and if money was no object and you were searching for a private lesson you would likely just buy one from the resort rather than seek out a private option).

So there is the logic. I have not been able to find a single thing on the internet addressing this subject and since many on this forum work at resorts or have extensive experience (or maybe someone is a lawyer who can chime in) I pose the next two questions to you guys: is it legal, and if so, what measures should be taken to be properly set up to provide these lessons (like insurance, waivers, etc...)?

I lean upon everyone's collective expertise.

[Michelle]

I have heard that it has to do with insurance reasons, because you are not an employee of the mountain their insurance will not cover you if someone gets hurt in lessons. Even if you had your own insurance, they could still sue the resort and most resorts will probably say no. However, not sure if that was just a push off or it's actually true.

Also, I know someone that was banned from Vail Resorts for life because he was caught teaching private lessons.

Just my 2Cents but I'm not a lawyer. Good luck!

[Jack M]

Well... they can't possibly bust you if you make it look like you are just helping a buddy out. If you're obviously coaching they might ask you what you're doing, and then of course you'd have to lie, and your client would have to be cool with that. I wouldn't want to have to do that. And then if they notice a pattern of you doing this on several different days, you're busted.

I don't know the law but I have to assume that making an actual business out of it is illegal. If you advertise online or in the paper they will catch on. If you wear a uniform with logos and name-tag they will get you instantly. Even if your marketing is purely word-of-mouth, it will find the wrong ears sooner than you think.

[Steve Prokopiw]

at the vast majority of resorts.People have been arrested and blackballed from places like Vail for trying it.It is about several issues...as Michele mentioned,insurance,but #1 is the money,and another issue,understandably,is the quality of the lesson itself.

I for one,have a problem with a place like Vail having a monopoly on public land simply because they have a concessions permit from the feds and state to run a resort on 12,000 acres we the people own.We should be allowed to aquire an outfitters license to teach on public land.Certainly there has to be accountability,but there is such in the process of aquiring the permit/licenses.Obviously fees would need to worked out for use of the infrastructure etc,but the opportunity should be there and it is not.

Some resorts do seem to have a 'don't ask don't tell' unwritten policy of looking the other way.I have been allowed to provide a hardboot learning experience at my home mountain in this way,mainly because no one in ski school is equipped to do so,and because the pay structure is nothing more than'volunteer wages' for which my time would be better spent helping out at a charity function.It's a tough racket in ski schools here in the Inland Northwest.They want an 6-8 hour commitment for two hours pay and hundreds in annual certification costs.I had to rethink much of my Colorado resort experience when I came up here to direct the skischool.Small resorts can be a good venue for rookie instructors to cut their teeth or older folks to teach as a hobby,but how motivated are people really going to be in a society like ours to actually lose money to be instructors. Volunteer wages for taking care of upper middle class and affluent people never made sense to me.There are more pressing uses of my time.

[scrapster]

Would be interested to hear a lawyer weigh in.

I'm not sure what "law" is being broken. Of course, if it is a private resort the company has a right to restrict access to their facility in any way they wish (for the most part.) That being said, if you violate their policies you could be considered a trespasser. Still, it seems more like a civil matter rather than a criminal one.

[queequeg]

at the vast majority of resorts .... ,but #1 is the money,and another issue,understandably,is the quality of the lesson itself.

I for one,have a problem with a place like Vail having a monopoly on public land simply because they have a concessions permit from the feds and state to run a resort on 12,000 acres we the people own.

I agree that It seems very unfair to permit companies operating on public land to ban people from their facilities on this basis. When I saw this thread, I immediately wondered what MHM's policy on this.

It also makes me wonder: what of friends teaching friends unpaid? This is a fairly common thing at ski resorts (with varying results, depending as much upon how knowledgeable the instructor is terms of snowboarding as s/he is in terms of teaching). Can a resort ban a skier for providing a free lesson to a friend who is learning or needs help? I have benefitted from countless hours of informal help/instruction provided by people on this forum free of charge, and have also done some teaching myself. In the case of our sport this is particularly relevant because (almost) no resort in the US is equipped to provide qualified instruction for alpine snowboarders.

I think it's 90% about the money. I doubt the insurance thing is really much of a motivator.

[scrapster]

Part of it is probably money lost from lessons and the other is probably fear over lawsuits.

If someone gets hurt, it would be a potent argument to say the resort knowingly allowed an unqualified instructor to teach on their hill. The injured party could even say they reasonably assumed the resort sanctioned the instructor offering his/her services there. And remember, the resort is the one with the deeper pockets. They'd be the primary target in an injury case.

[BlueB]

I do not see how would you brake any state or federal laws by teching for money, as long as you pay tax on it. However, you'd brake the law No1 of any resort: no money changes hands without their knowledge, approval and cut :D It is called business. They have concession to run their business and they are going to protect it. If you get busted, you'd be banned from the resort, period. If you advertised by any means, they'd check on you. I have advertised on Craigslist for hardboot and freeride lessons, even stating that booking is THROUGH Cypress school and they still checked on me, pretending it's an email from a 3rd party.

Then, I do not know of anyone banned of a resort for teaching friends or family on free basis. We even allow (unvillingly, though) those people to use our semi-fenced teaching area to teach absolute begginners.

The only way that your concept could work, would be to offer something very different from what local snow school has got (hard boots?) and convince the mountain to allow you to do it, while taking their cut or charging you a fixed anual fee.

In Canada, full members of CASI have liabillity cover included in our membership fees. This still doesn't stop the client from sueing the mountain if they wanted to.

[Michelle]

Part of it is probably money lost from lessons and the other is probably fear over lawsuits.

If someone gets hurt, it would be a potent argument to say the resort knowingly allowed an unqualified instructor to teach on their hill. The injured party could even say they reasonably assumed the resort sanctioned the instructor offering his/her services there. And remember, the resort is the one with the deeper pockets. They'd be the primary target in an injury case.

That's the bottom line. It's all about who would get sued in case something went wrong. If a "friend" is teaching another friend and not being paid, it is not considered an official transaction, just like if I loaned my friend my car vs charging someone to rent it.

It's partly about money, and partly about being sued. Yes, it's public land but they have the leasing rights and therefore becomes a private establishment. My condo sits on land owned by the complex but they don't have jurisdiction over what happens inside my private residence.

[just give 'er]

In Canada, CASI does provide liability insurance, however it's important to note that it is supplementary insurance, and that it kicks in after the snow school's insurance. If setting up a camp, clinic, lesson program etc. you'd need to secure your own liability insurance in addition to CASI's insurance.

As far as breaking the law, I've known of people being charged with tresspassing for teaching on resort property. You wouldn't think of selling steak knives in a department stores kitchen section...

[BlueB]

In Canada' date=' CASI does provide liability insurance, however it's important to note that it is supplementary insurance, and that it kicks in after the snow school's insurance. If setting up a camp, clinic, lesson program etc. you'd need to secure your own liability insurance in addition to CASI's insurance. [/quote']

Good point!

[Atom Ant]

Seems like this topic has raised a lot of personal issues people have with the current resort set up. For me, at this point, this is more an intellectual exercise than anything else. I was looking at the ridiculous prices that resorts charge for the lessons alone (let alone a lift ticket, equipment, etc...) and thinking, "how many more people would try an alpine sport if it wasn't quite to cost prohibitive to learn?" The thinking being: if you can hook someone of the sport for cheap they become a lifelong participant and thus this benefits the resorts, equipment manufacturers, all involved in alpine sports. It seems to be lessons are a prime target for privatization, so to speak.

Buying insurance wouldn't be as expensive as you may think, although its not chump change. I know of several potential providers. The issue seems to be the short sighted nature of the resorts themselves. Maybe I will just call the local hill where I would be doing these lessons and see if a deal can be worked out. After all, as I mentioned in my original post, I will be driving traffic their way in the form of ticket sales, equipment rentals, cafe sales, and the potential for these students to become lifelong participants and return customers.

Another comment that struck a nerve with me was the terrible pay most instructors receive in exchange for all their hard work and dedication and certificates. I was a certified instructor a while ago and was paid $7.25/hour. The second year I taught I got a raise.... to $7.50/hour.

[BlueB]

Another comment that struck a nerve with me was the terrible pay most instructors receive in exchange for all their hard work and dedication and certificates. I was a certified instructor a while ago and was paid $7.25/hour. The second year I taught I got a raise.... to $7.50/hour.

Sheeesh! And I thought the wages at our local hills are super low... $7.50 would be even illegal in BC.

[Allee]

Seems like this topic has raised a lot of personal issues people have with the current resort set up. For me, at this point, this is more an intellectual exercise than anything else. I was looking at the ridiculous prices that resorts charge for the lessons alone (let alone a lift ticket, equipment, etc...) and thinking, "how many more people would try an alpine sport if it wasn't quite to cost prohibitive to learn?" The thinking being: if you can hook someone of the sport for cheap they become a lifelong participant and thus this benefits the resorts, equipment manufacturers, all involved in alpine sports.

That's what the ride board here is for. Anyone who wants to learn can just post on there, and then the lovely locals will loan you gear and teach you everything they know. 'Cos we're good like that.

[queequeg]

You wouldn't think of selling steak knives in a department stores kitchen section...

If lessons were a resorts primary source of income this might be a better comparison (to my mind), but they are not. I would assume most ski resorts make most of their money from Lodging, Lift Tickets, Food/Drink, and Rentals. Can somebody in the industry confirm where the lions share of a resort's income generally lies, and where lessons stack up in that list? I would assume lessons are pretty low on that list, though I'm sure they still provide a substation source of income. I think this argument makes a lot more sense when the resort is not on public land, but resorts on public land should not be able to prevent outsiders from providing lessons (IMO).

Part of the problem is that so many resorts do not have very good instruction on offer, I've seen some pretty dismal instructors. So if they don't allow outside instructors, and their own instructors suck you can either pay too much for a lesson that will probably leave you with bad habits, or try to learn on your own. It seems like it would be much better if resorts offered some kind of special pass for people who wanted to teach, you pay more for it, demonstrate competency, agree to go by their rules etc ...

Otherwise, regarding the liability stuff: how is it that being injured while engaged in a (paid/unaffiliated) lesson entitles you to sue the mountain in a way that being injured during an (unpaid/unaffiliated) lesson does not? I would think that a lesson provided by an endorsed mountain employee/affiliate expressly would give the injured party far greater leverage in a lawsuit than a lesson provided by some yahoo that the mountain doesn't know from adam. Of course, the legal system in the US doesn't always make sense. (I'm not asking this to be argumentative, I'm genuinely curious). I would think suing the mountain over a lesson provided by an unaffiliated party would be no different than suing the mountain over an incident that occurred during non-educational skiing activities.

[Steve Prokopiw]

I do not see how would you brake any state or federal laws by teching for money, as long as you pay tax on it. However, you'd brake the law No1 of any resort: no money changes hands without their knowledge, approval and cut :D It is called business. They have concession to run their business and they are going to protect it. If you get busted, you'd be banned from the resort, period. If you advertised by any means, they'd check on you. I have advertised on Craigslist for hardboot and freeride lessons, even stating that booking is THROUGH Cypress school and they still checked on me, pretending it's an email from a 3rd party.

Then, I do not know of anyone banned of a resort for teaching friends or family on free basis. We even allow (unvillingly, though) those people to use our semi-fenced teaching area to teach absolute begginners.

The only way that your concept could work, would be to offer something very different from what local snow school has got (hard boots?) and convince the mountain to allow you to do it, while taking their cut or charging you a fixed anual fee.

In Canada, full members of CASI have liabillity cover included in our membership fees. This still doesn't stop the client from sueing the mountain if they wanted to.

With the last paragraph especially.Although PSIA/AASI does not provide insurance.(One of several reasons I no longer pay into or belong to the organization)This is what I have a meeting next week about doing.In the interest of doing legitimate business I am presenting a proposal on several fronts involving instruction and video.I believe what I will be presenting shows how a different business model can benefit the resort and my ability to generate customer satisfaction and loyalty as well as income for the resort and my family.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

With the last paragraph especially.Although PSIA/AASI does not provide insurance.(One of several reasons I no longer pay into or belong to the organization)This is what I have a meeting next week about doing.In the interest of doing legitimate business I am presenting a proposal on several fronts involving instruction and video.I believe what I will be presenting shows how a different business model can benefit the resort and my ability to generate customer satisfaction and loyalty as well as income for the resort and my family.

Couple notes Steve. Address the powers to be from what you can do for them. Your ambitions must be portrayed in a way that serves them. NOT YOU!! Frankly, if the focus is alpine, it will be a really tough sell and probably will not represent enough money to interest them or anyone else. Sad but currently true. "Public Land" ?? Yes, however, it is leased. If you rent property it is largely yours to control. Ask any landlord about tenant rights. For sake of this discussion , they own the property rights, they pay for that right and it is NOT ours to use at will. Simply stated , it is a big "No, No" on numerous levels to "Do Work" in their house for pay. This includes, guiding, video, lunch, coaching, photography, tuning, teaching, etc, etc. Doing most anything for pay would open you up for all sorts of bad senerios. Don't loose everything over a risky venture. Don't fight city hall. Ask yourself if you have another successfull example of what you are proposing to them? They are going to want to see it's track record elsewhere. Companies/people like to think they are daring and cutting edge, few are. The large majority will wait till everyone is already in the water and the coast is clear. Good luck my friend. Bryan

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110228142314AA3A0OQ

http://forums.mammothmountain.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1190

http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=59810

Steve.

Use this search string --- for ALLOT more on the topic.

illegal private lessons on ski area

[kieran]

do your (USA) resorts own the land the slopes are on?

here the companies are just operators of uplift, so they can take your pass away from you but they can't stop you from teaching.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

do your (USA) resorts own the land the slopes are on?

here the companies are just operators of uplift, so they can take your pass away from you but they can't stop you from teaching.

Yes and NO. Some are privately held lands, many are Federal lands. Leasing the land provides them many of the same rights held by and owner.

[Steve Prokopiw]

I always take your advice to mind.I am,however aware of all the points you mentioned.Please don't presume that I know nothing or have not thought this out.

You can fight city hall by the way.We did it successfully in Gypsum,Colorado..another story.

Rules are rules,legislation is legislation and on and on...I believe to my core that a bidding process should be opened for competetive services on public lands, especially where they involve the monopolization of such large areas that are part of a community or local/regional economy.Competition is supposed to be the lifeblood of capitalism,but we all know that it is much more predatory than just that.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

I immediately wondered what MHM's policy on this.

It would be a very large "NO", this I can assure you.

One of the main reasons I have not already held events there.

I understand it, you must play with their rules in their sandbox.

It may be a shame, but it is the way it is. Simple really.

Involve them, make it their's or risk the penalty.

Sounds like the members involved with NICE in Idaho have the right idea.

Even some of the informal free lessons during the World Carving Session are in a gray area I fear.

Although going International would exponentially complicate any legal actions.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

I have been looking into providing private lessons at a local hill during work-week evenings and am trying to determine if this is allowed or not on my own before resorting to calling the hill and straight up asking. My instincts tell me that their default answer will be "no", however I am not sure that answer will be reflective of the true answer, but rather just their preference.

Blue Hills will know very shortly if you do this without their blessing. Know that. Although if their legal dept is similar to the web department it might have trouble with follow up?

Vertical Drop: 309'

Skiable Terrain: 60 acres

[Beckmann AG]

The land may be public, but the resort is private property.

As such, when using the resort (for a fee), you have agreed to abide by their rules, some of which may be implied rather than expressed.

If you did not have a hand in, or have a stake in, the expenses of constructing/operating that resort, should you really feel entitled to profit from the infrastructure?

A lawyer indicated that upward of 50% of the cost of a day ticket goes to liability insurance. As a lawyer, the accuracy of his testimony is suspect, but don't assume the resort is making much at the point of entry.

Ski schools are generally a profit center for a resort. A cursory glance at the product pricing and the raw wage involved should make that obvious.

The numbers are real, and impressive.

Rational thought does not always play a part in resort management. You may feel you are contributing in some way to the revenue stream by driving hypothetical clients toward hypothetical purchases, but the resort is concerned mainly by the numbers predicted by the business model and past history, not your promise of how many pair of socks or cans of Red Bull you might move.

When you teach a friend, there is no contract, and thus no expectation of revenue. As soon as you agree to be paid for service, that counts as lost revenue, regardless of whether or not your client would take a lesson from the ski school in your absence.

Look at it this way: Your neighbor pays the same condo association fees and mortgage that you do. Does that entitle him to chill his beer in your refrigerator, and then sell that beer for profit on your deck, to anyone he can draw in through word of mouth or an ad on CL? You probably wouldn't like that scenario, even if his beer was of high quality, and you would send him packing.

In short, you can find the rationale to justify what it is you want to do, but don't be surprised if you don't like the outcome.

A business is loathe to suffer a drain on their cash cow, and will waste little time in patching the udder.

Assuming your sense of propriety has been injured and needs a salve, your best bet is to get involved officially, prove your ability to deliver on a niche product, and propose a plan by which you may both profit.

There are many good reasons to get into the teaching of alpine sport. 'Equitable' remuneration is not one of them.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Well said Beckmann. Well said.

[utahcarver]

Last season, I was the recipient of some excellent coaching on-hill at a northern Utah ski area. Because this ski area, as well as ALL other Utah ski areas don't offer 'hard-booting, carving, racing, or alpine-style riding' lessons or coaching or anything related to this subject, I was forced to obtain coaching, lessons, from someone I hired to teach me. Over the course of several days, this 'coach' taught other riders including one of my sons.

Was the law violated? Probably. Should I care? Nope. One of the old maxims (?) of law is Habeus Corpus (Bring forth the body). Sorry, I'm not a lawyer so my knowledge of law is from a layman's viewpoint. That is, show the court the damaged property or the damaged person(s). It seems to me that this ski area would have to provide proof that their property (real or productive) was damaged by this agreement I had with my 'coach'.

I could not find a suitable source for information locally, so I went shopping for it online. The execution of the delivery was local and probably violated several existing laws which prohibit the exchange of information due to lack of licensing, profitability, and market. That said, I had a great day of riding and gained some important information which was not available on-hill from the ski area. Their loss. My gain.

Another black-market shopper done happy!

Mark