UKH

I am a CWA, CWAA, CWLA, SPA, FCA, ML Trained assessed but deferred on night nav. Done fundas 1 and 2. Phys training for climbing 1 and Nav masterclass. I have climbed for 20 years in Uk and Europe with Alpine experience and yet if I was to work in this industry I would expect to Receive minimum wage or just above. I have spent a hell of a lot of time and money getting these quals and I'm now thinking was it /is it really worth it. I have worked in the industry ad hoc and earned a few quid here and there which probably covered the cost of my quals, first aid and insurance but on the whole I'm probably working at a net loss when you take into account the amount of time training and money spent on travelling and kit not to mention the time spent messing on with the inadequate DLOG. Compare this with my day job, I spent a year distance learning, I did 5 x 4hour exams and now I earn just shy of 30k per year not including bonus and benefits and only work 4 and half days a week on flexi time and I am at the lowest level of my trade. Are the MTA quals just a money making scam or is the industry just grossly underpaid?

Industry is grossly underpaid. 

Possibly because of the number of people who work in it as a sideline (hobby) alongside a better paying job? 

Certainly impacted by part time workers just charging 80 quid a day..

But its also a job people want to do, so lots do. Basic supply.

I'm a marine biologist, degree, PhD, best part of a decade post docing, it's so hard to get well paid work to start off, so many just pick up internships and rarely earn enough to justify their training. I'm in a facebook group and see the people who have worked for years unpaid so they can say they are marine biologists.

I was offered a lectureship for $36,000 basic salary, even one at a solid state school like UMaine was $44,000. As a high school teacher I earn $50-60,000 and can typically pick up work pretty quickly. With a family it's a no brainer.

Very few earn enough as with the basic qualifications to live a good life. You'd earn more just doing a trade. Plenty do earn an OK living but do something which makes them stand out from the crowd a bit, higher levels of qualifications, excel at their discipline etc.

Bit of both, the industry is underpaid and NGB's have to fund themselves somehow. MTA isn't the worst of them imo but the latest changes have put it a bit more inline with other "coaching pathways" where the list of qualifications to gain (and pay for) gets bigger and bigger. They never seem to consolidate. In the MTA's defence I think I'm right in saying it's the only NGB (or one of the only) where you don't have to pay a membership fee to gain or keep qualifications if you don't want to.

I know a number of instructors who have cancelled their BCU membership and just decided they can make enough money without paddling. For some that's decades of teaching quals invalidated. The latest changes just seem to have confused everyone and if you're on a lowly instructors wage then there are some quite brutal chioces to make in who you continue to pay to be able to do your job. If you're multi-disciplined then it's a lot of time and money that needs to be spent on CPD, courses, updates and membership fees and that's before you've taken into account the other necessary expenses that allow you to operate outdoors.

The way things are going now with ropes courses and inspections I can see a point in the future where you not only need your teaching quals but where PPE inspection and high ropes quals become a mandetory part of operation. Once upon a time it would just have been expected that if you're an experienced mountain biking guide you would probably be able to fix a bike and make sure your clients brakes work...but then where's the fun in that when you can pay to follow a bike maintainence pathway and get a certificate to show you can change a bike chain. I think one of the big issues is the likes of the ropes access industry and other safety intensive industries are passing on their standards to a sector which can't afford them. I have genuinely seen a brand new in it's packaging bike helmet go towards the bin because it was manufactured more than 5 years ago. I've seen thousands of pounds of climbing kit condemned by one inspector and then uncondemned by another. There's a lot of confusion and interpretation of standards and the industry just can't support the same kind of standards you see in aviation and the oil industry for example.

There aren't many people that make a living out of one outdoors sport, you really need to have a mix to pick up enough work to put food on the table and even then you're unlikely to be earning as much as your current job even before you've taken expenses into account. It's not unheard of to find well qualified instructors picking up construction jobs or the like to top up their income.

Equally all of those are pretty low level qualifications which at most might equate to an A-Level in terms of effort (CWA, CWLA and SPA are close enough together that they can't really be considered separately). Would you expect to be paid much beyond minimum wage with A-Levels and no further training? I certainly wasn't during my placement year and I was based in the SE.

I suspect that MCI and BMG qualifications are somewhere around Masters Degree and PhD levels respectively, I doubt they have equivalent levels of pay due to the inherent costs of doing the work but the level of training is probably equivalent.

It's purely down to what members of the public either individually or as an organisation (schools etc.) are prepared to pay for a day with an instructor or leader. 

In the era where many folk think they can just find a you tube video that teaches them something for free. 

It's curious though, a private ski instructor might often charge £50/hr, £300/day. But most in the climbing world, even instructors and guides could only dream of having enough clients willing to pay that year round, despite the fact that hanging off a mountain by a single rope is certainly higher risk. 

But as said above, whilst not wishing to knock the lower level quals an active climber, walker, paddler, caver..  can easily accrue the necessary routes and criteria in a year. 

Depends what you do with them. 

The most cost - ineffective part of my professional development was almost certainly the two years of a degree that (whilst fun at the time) landed me in debt and hasn’t really contributed to my employability. I’ve made far more financial return on the relatively minimal investment on Mountain Training courses. 

I don’t think they are particularly overpriced, but if course that’s relative to my circumstances. The industry I feel is underpaid, but of course that is also down to what the customer is prepared to pay.

An impact is (as mentioned above) part time instructors happy to work for less because they can/have other income as this does reduce the rate that others can charge. 

Guess it’s all about perceived value - I know how much I need to earn, and how much money I then need to charge. If a customer doesn’t value that (or an employer tries to contract me for less) I’d rather not work.

in your particular case - the ML is probably the big ticket you’re missing - way more work out there for MLs than the Climbing Awards, until you have your own customer base for climbing/coaching (although for that you’ll probably want Dev Coach, RCDI/MCI to allow you to be a pure climbing business)

My current professional Quals are equivalent to A level quals so yes  I would expect a lot more than minimum wage, a hell of a lot more when you include experience of which I have lots in both my current profession and as a climbing coach and instructor. My main point though is the time and effort it takes to get MTA Quals and high level of responsibility required plus travel expenses and kit versus other industries and the pay difference. Take the ML for instance. One week training, min 6 month consolidation 1 week of pretty much continuous assessment which equates to many, many hours and in return all you get a basic level qual that really in the grand scheme of things don't allow you to do very much at all. Then when you look at MIA, the cost, time and effort and experience needed to get the qual versus the pay you would be expected to receive just doesn't add up in my eyes. You could earn the same in a successful call centre with minimal GCSE,s. I know lots of MIA,s who don't work in the industry for that very reason, but I guess people do it for the life style and the passion for the outdoors not just the money.

The problem with all of this is that historically it's something people just went out and did. Novices learnt from more experienced friends. Formulating qualifications around it could be perceived as contrived and opportunist.  Trying to compare it with professional technical qualifications is absurd. I speak as someone who has done SPA and ML and I can say in all modesty and honesty that I did not LEARN a single thing from either.  I tell a lie, I did learn about flora and fauna as I was encouraged to do so by the instructor during the course.  When it came to assessment the new instructor could not have cared less about this so even the curriculum is woolly.  I would not go so far as to say it is worthless but we should keep it in perspective. It's supply and demand.  If there were too many Doctors and not enough demand for their services they would be low paid as well.  Claiming that just because you spent money and time on something does not automatically guarantee a good income and comes across as sour grapes.

For gods sake I understand that there is now a qualification for being an indoors assistant.  Talk about jumping on a gravy train.

Al

"The industry I feel is underpaid, but of course that is also down to what the customer is prepared to pay."

And what ML's are prepared to charge. I do think those with full time jobs, like me, like to work as an ML on the weekend and just make some pocket money so work for 80 quid a day. That makes it harder for those who rely on that wage.

But it's a free market.

I have worked in the US and UK, and in the US work with no qualifications, just WFR (outdoors first aid) and red cross life guarding qualification when around water (with CPR/AED). With those I'll have kids hiking (in the white mountains), kayaking, SUP, canoeing etc. 

I wonder if the awards bodies in the UK could end up taking themselves out.

It'll basically come down to insurance providers, in the US I work through a camp so they provide my insurance and just stipulate the courses required. It scares me how incompetent some of the other counselors were though. I had one guy I refused to work with around water as his concentration was awful. Eventually he was sacked.

I earned very little though but it was a summer 6 week position when I'm off teaching and still getting paid as a teacher.

I totally agree, back in the day we learned by trial and error and by going out with others with more experience.  I think the statement of youth film and valley uprising kind of puts things into prospective look at how far they progressed and the boundaries' that were pushed.  The sheer amount of silly quals and training schemes the MTA are dreaming up is insane. That's why I think its a bit of a money making scam.

It's this. Which, in turn, is driven by the increasing commercialisation of the outdoors. Yes, that's those of you wanting jobs as guides and instructors...

Of course it's a money making enterprise. 

As more and more people "qualify" as instructors there becomes a need to continue encouraging others that they too need to get qualified in order to keep the machine working. 

It's seen as a mark of achievement by many. Count up the number of posts on this forum for mock clients wanted by trainee MIA types.... where is it all going to end? Qualifications for everybody?

I'll bet some of these commercial enterprises have wet dreams about the day arriving when you have to be qualified to climb

Al

Trial and error of the Lyme bay or cairngorm plateau tragedy style? 

Not all courses are pointless paper chases dreamt up purely to keep folk in employment.

Was the Cairngorm expedition not led by a holder of the MIC?

Sometimes qualifications need to be backed up by experience and common sense.

No. The 21yr old instructor (unknown qusls) took the stronger kids up a different route, the less experienced and even younger assistant took the rest on easier ground. It was the unqualified young lass and kids in the later group which died. 

I'm unsure if 21 yr old was MIC or not? Are you? I wouldn't want to speculate as he can't defend himself either due to fact he died in the Himalayas since then. 

Note. In days of olde MIC training and assessment was one course. Now it's separate. Plus to maintain long term membership of AMI you have to accrue Cpd points by attending training and refresher events.  

Yes he was an MIC

Shows how the schemes have changed. You don't get many MICs under 31 and certainly not 21 these days! 

I believe the leader went on to instruct at Glenmore Lodge.

It's a ponzi scheme and you've entered at the lowest level, you need to invest more and level up to recruit and train more punters.  Obviously you can only do this by buying more qualifications...

That's not the same as saying he was an MIC there at the time. Plus he wasn't the one leading the actual kids who died, but was certainly involved in the decision making process to split the group's etc.. 

Either way. That event and Lyme bay were two pivotal points that vastly changed and improved how outdoor qualifications are managed by governing bodies. I would hope today that any instructor leading kids in winter or on the seas wouldn't make similar errors of judgement. 

I make an adequate living from being a Winter Mountaineering and Climbing Instructor and International Mountain Leader but have to ensure I have different income strands within that. Like many colleagues I variously teach/guide climbers and mountaineers, provide technical advice, train and assess other award holders, work on overseas expeditions, work for a local college, coach people at the wall and I'm fortunate to be able to work in summer and winter. 

With the lower Awards its really tough to make a good living, especially to cope with a mortgage and a family. Most people either: change careers, move into management (walls, outdoor centres, retail etc.) or need to do the higher Awards and work very hard to maintain a good customer base. Most of the ones I know who are successful look on passing an Award as a starting point. After they hold the Award they learnt to use it, developing, doing CPD, volunteering for further experience, attending related courses and the successful ones also have to be good 'people people' too (someone who is good with people/parks their ego and makes it about the people they work with AND holds qualifications will probably succeed... a poor 'people person' who is an amazing climber and qualified... maybe not so much).

The successful ones work very, very hard. They use social media effectively and/or build large networks of employers who they try very hard to always do good work for to build their reputation. Many offer free advice on facebook forums/UKC. They have to compete against volunteers/part-time qualification holders/enthusiastic amateurs/new Instructors often with no family commitments or mortgage charging low prices to break into the market... but the successful ones rarely complain too much about these people (they all have their place in the outdoors and I am not having a go at any of these groups) because they are too busy doing a good enough job to make a living.

Note I fully accept that there are mediocre MLs, MCIs etc., just like there are mediocre plumbers, sparkies, shop assistants, bus drivers and doctors.

(Oh, and the MTA is a membership organisation that exists as the support and development arm of Mountain Training: its there to support people walking towards Awards, develop those who hold them and provide opportunities for anyone in either category. Mountain Training is the collective name for the organisations managing skills and qualification schemes for walking and climbing in the UK. It includes the Home Nation Boards and MTUK who run the higher end Awards and co-ordinate the activities of the other boards.... confusing isn't it? So the Awards are all Mountain Training (MT) awards, provided by MTUK (e.g. IML, MCI, WMCI, Coaching Awards)or MTS/MTE etc (for the other Awards). The MTA is not involved in running the Awards). 

I wasn’t suggesting that he worked at Glenmore Lodge at the time of the tragedy but being the leader obviously didn’t hinder his career.

The tightening of regulations in how outdoor centres are run has had as much effect on safety as the introduction of new qualifications.

But outdoor qualifications are a bit like an MOT in that they don’t carry any guarantee of future safety.

Would agree. 

But it's quoted in many place a qualification isn't qualification alone, it goes with recent logbook experience and a current first aid certicate. 

Plus at least a qualification proves you were safe previously, rather than never! 

Indeed.

That is optimistic!