UKC

Similar to the furore regarding the MCof S awarding Mr Muir a grant to subsidise his professional sponsorships. A few years ago I did a couple of days guiding work for Scott, and enquired about how he came across the 3 American clients - he was in the MCof S office, a letter came in enquiring about instructors/guides in Scotland, and they simply passed the letter on to Scott. Does that sound fair, or is there just a whiff of favouritism towards your friends/climbing partners? The same accusations could equally be levelled at the fiasco over the MCof S bolting policy and the unnecessary bolting Benny Beag? Doesn't exactly fit in with the current policy, does it?

GL

In reply to Gary Latter:

It sounds like the quickest and most convenient way of dealing with a request. Look at it frm the point of view of the MCoS person who received the letter. There's a reasonable chance they're quite busy. Do you:
a) give the letter to someone standing next to you and getting the request dealt with in seconds flat, or
b) go to your list of guides and phone someone up, only to find that they're out, so you leave a message on their answering machine. They phone back the next day to say they're busy on the requested day, so you have to try to someone else. You leave another message and then you remember they've gone to the Alps for a week and won't get back to you for some time.....

In reply to Gary Latter: You pass on the current details of all Instructors and Guides operating in the area concerned (Scotland), as opposed to your buddy. That way, you are not abusing your position, and everyone is on an even playing field. Other professional operators rely on costly advertising, distribution of leaflets/posters and other publicity material, as opposed to bypassing their competitors in this clear abuse of a supposedly professional full-time paid post.
GL

In reply to Gary Latter:

Just to act as Devil's Advocate slightly, I think in another thread it has been stated that Scott Muir isn't employed by MCoS, he works as a volunteer and has only ever had expenses paid for helping with things (its on a thread about their expedition grants I think).

Unless of course you means the MCoS guy who originally recieved the request as the "supposedly professional full-time post" which he has abused by passing it on. In which case the above point is probably irrelevant.

AJM

In reply to AJM: also the Americans could have just bought a UK mag and taken their pick. The MCofS isn't there as tourist info, they were doing the Americans a favour. They found them a qualified guide. Whats so wrong about that? If Gary had been in the office at the time maybe he would have got the letter.

Gary, just as well Scott was such a decent chap as to give some of the work with the Americans to you...
As for getting money of MCofS to go on climbing 'expeditions', I see no difference to someone like Scott getting something and someone climbing a big hill - all the money in each case does is help pay for someones holiday. Rather see the money used for access etc., but the way things go with funding that aint going to happen I guess.

In reply to gr:
And Gary, if you really feel so strongly about the Bennybeg bolts then chop them. re the guiding you mentioned above - nepotism or expedience, who knows - best you ask Kev about that?