West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I gave up posting on here a while ago due to pointless comment, runaway conspiracy theory, and the same posters expressing their personal anguish as nauseum. Thinking recently that it was perhaps time to re-engage I thought it worth adding the odd bit of factual information occasionally.

Clearly factual posting remains pointless.

Bye.

 

No worries Alan. I was surprised you hadn't spotted it there before. But hey it gave me a chance to plug wsr.org.uk again

Steve
wsr.org.uk

 

The situation that you, and others find themselves in is reminiscent of an apprentice.
The apprentice makes a mess of a thing, ok, we'll cope. Makes a mess of another thing, ok, don't do it again, and so on. Then the lad has a bad day/week/month. Upsets a customer. says the wrong thing to Fred who had a barney with his wife before work, forgets Sid's tobacco when he goes to the shop, cuts a pile of noggins an inch too short, makes the tea and breaks Frank's mug. And becomes A ----. Then the lad tries to point out that he's done something right, and gets an earful of abuse (mostly from the older apprentice who is currently revelling in not being the ----.
The only thing the apprentice can do to redeem himself is quietly get on and try not to make any more mistakes. The guys will notice. One day the older apprentice will be badmouthing the younger to one of the guys, who will point out "Nobby isn't such an idiot as you make out. You were just as bad, and you're not much better now"
I was one or both of those apprentices. Its human nature rather than anti-WSR conspiracy. Surely you can see there has been some really bad stuff happened. It will take time, and a lot of small successes to outweigh the past couple of years.

I think four loco's in service is an achievement worthy of some pride Currently the WSR's turnout is top notch, and double headed manors a spectacle I am sad to miss. I hope this weekend goes well in every way, brings joy to all. Volunteers, passengers, managers. Specially you

 

This isn't an airport, you don't need to announce your departure.

 

This really needs to be given more publicity.

This is outrageous behaviour by the WSSRT and PLC. Basically the WSSRT have found that they have no grounds to throw out these people, so they handed the matter over to the PLC and said 'see what you can do'. Bearing in mind the longstanding issue regarding the lack of PLC HR policies, how were these individuals supposed to have a fair trial? It is ridiculous for the WSSRT acting chairman to then claim that the PLC is not meddling in the trust's affairs when the trust has specifically asked the plc to take action against these people because the trust can't!

I sincerely hope that @ikcdab @aldfort @FrankC @Maunsell907 @Lineisclear @6960 Raveningham Hall and any others associated with the WSR and it's groupings will all be publicly condemning this action.

This is not preservation, this is revenge and spitefulness. Every trustee of the WSSRT should hang their heads in shame.

 

Aaaah! Pure nostalgia! Thanks.
Pat

 

It is strange, because the behaviour which really brought the WSSRT and the WSR as a whole into disrepute was that of the existing trustees and the PLC and the depths they were willing to stoop to to smear the prospective new trustees

 

It was the current management that ran to the local papers issuing hasty press releases dragging the WSR's name through the gutter, to absolutely no benefit, it's not like the public had a vote anyway!

 

Apparently the charter is now only going as far as Watchet and not Dunster according to WSR Friends f/b page.

Whether the pax are now being bused to Minehead still , I have no idea.

Dave B

 

It still tells me I need a sign-on so, no, we can't all see it.

 

AIUI passengers have a choice to stay and look around Watchet or a bus to Minehead.
The train goes ECS back to BL for servicing and returns later in the day.

 

When as previously pointed out the complainant was also a member of the WSR plc board, and so, conflicted.

You couldn't make this stuff up!

It is both extraordinary, and shows what many knew for sometime, but refrained from posting on here.

I can quickly imagine where the "appeal" fund might be going to a tune of some £50,000 or significantly more ... No need to spell it out.

 

Is this an accurate rendition of what Mr Williams wrote to @johnofwessex? In particular it seems likely that the final sentence in the first of the quoted paragraphs was intended to be: “The PLC determined that there was a case to answer in relation to bringing the railway into disrepute,” or some similar expression.

In any case, even if the quotation of Mr Williams' letter is only broadly correct it suggests a quite bizarre situation. Apparently four individuals are alleged to have taken some unspecified action that had some (again) unspecified impact upon the WSRHT that its trustees treated as “serious” and “totally unwarranted”. If the individuals concerned were members of the WSRHT then Article 12 of that Trust's Articles of Association makes available a procedure for termination of their membership that the WSRHT trustees could have invoked. If they weren't members but were thought to have been interfering unlawfully in the WSRHT's internal affairs then civil law mechanisms to restrain them from doing so were potentially available to the trustees.

It appears from Mr Williams' letter that instead of taking either of these courses the WSRHT trustees formally requested a legally unconnected commercial company to investigate the conduct of the individuals concerned with a view to determining “whether any action was required against” them. If the conduct to be investigated pertained only to the affairs of the WSRHT then it was exclusively a matter for the WSRHT trustees to deal with. Any investigation of such conduct by an unconnected body such as the WSR plc apparently ran an immediate risk of constituting harassment of the individuals concerned, the more so since it was an investigation directed to a decision on whether further action was required against them other than under the constitution of the WSRHT.*

Harassment is conduct capable of forming the subject of a criminal prosecution. Inciting another to commit the offence of harassment may also form the subject of a prosecution. This isn't my area of legal expertise so I am happy to yield to someone better qualified than I to analyse the position. However, from what I can see in Mr Williams' letter it looks as though the WSRHT may have steered both itself and the WSR plc into rather perilous legal waters.

Leaving aside the legal implications, I am quite sure that if I perceived myself to be at risk of the actions by the WSRHT and WSR plc that are set out in Mr Williams' letter my personal response would be immediate withdrawal of any support and assistance I might otherwise have provided for them.

*”Although harassment is not specifically defined in section 7(2) of the PHA (Protection from Harassment Act 1997), it can include repeated attempts to impose unwanted communications and contact upon a victim in a manner that could be expected to cause distress or fear in any reasonable person.” (https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/stalking-and-harassment)

 

I tried, and only got a login screen - though I don’t do Facebook, I will follow public links rather than just moan.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I would imagine that the persons who found themselves being harrassed by the PLC/ WSRHT, Will have taken legal advice, and any action will still be on going, this may be why they have remained silent, as to not jeopardise any case that may be brought against those officials who took this action,
What does it mean? clearly, the PLC Are not just facing a financial problem, keeping the WSR as a viable concern, but could also face a damaging legal case, for which, i can see no grounds for the defence, that has the potential to bankrupt the PLC, If damages are awarded against those officers who clearly have abused their positions, it would be double damaging, bordering on stupidity if one of those expelled, was a barrister, and it was proven that this was indeed based on personal animosity by the acting chair, against this person, , Revenge, it is said is best served cold, colder the better.

 

Ice cold.

 

Yes But!

To be clear I would never condone bad treatment of volunteers. They are the lifeblood of many heritage railways and you mistreat them/ take them for granted at your peril.

However, before the armchair lawyers get too excited by prophesies on impending legal doom remember that under UK Law there is no right to volunteer. It follows that there is no enforceable right to be allowed to continue to do so. Volunteers' opportunity to continue can be withdrawn for any reason or none. In particular the Equality Act protection against discrimination does not apply to volunteers.

Their protection against arbitrary treatment or discrimination is the consequent impact on the organisation's ability to recruit and retain the volunteers it needs. However egregious it may be arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory exclusion of a volunteer does not, at the moment, expose the organisation to any legal liability.

 

Entirely correct.

But perhaps not the whole of the relevant legal landscape.

(From a lawyer in her armchair.)

 

They may not have the right to volunteer. They do have a right not to be harassed.

 

As history shows the legal landscape is a vista of opportunity for the adventurous.