North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Must admit I had always expected volunteers had to pay for their medicals and only paid staff had the company pay. How wrong I was.

 

No, only for safety critical roles.
The need for volunteers to be a member to be covered by insurance is an old chestnut. Checking with your brokers would confirm it’s almost certain to be untrue.

 

Why has the railway never joined forces with the likes of these to create event weekends on the railway?

WHITBY GOTH WEEKEND HOME - Whitby Goth Weekend

WHITBY 60s WEEKEND welcome2whitby.co.uk/events/whitby-60-s-spectacular/

WHITBY REGATTA Welcome to Whitby Regatta

 

Indeed, we are back to the virtuous conveyor that goes

Visit —> Join —> Volunteer
—> Donate

@Lineisclear seems to want visitors, and is no doubt happy to receive donations, but seems very keen to break the chain that draws the casual visitor through to committed volunteer and / or donor - which is the membership body.

As @21B said up thread:

Tom

 

thanks John. I think you've pretty much proved my point. the NYMR, or at least you, only see the value of members and volunteers as what they cost, not the benefit they provide.

 

I think that the SVR is lucky, but not unique, in this respect. A significant number of railways have to pay for the services of a suitably qualified medical examiner.

 

HRA guidance on the matter simply says safety critical staff and their medical requirements should be subject to a risk assessment. Unless I am very much mistaken, if a signalman unfortunately drops dead whilst on duty, there might be a delay to trains but there would be no danger to those trains and the people on them. I know another major railway that argues that the similar applies to firemen. Or at least it did when I read their risk assessment, admittedly some time ago. I'm less inclined to go along with that argument, though.

 

That used to be the case on the NYMR but it is no longer so. You don't have to be a member and pay a subscription to volunteer. The reason given is that it may be a barrier to someone volunteering. I know of another railway that camed up with the same argument but the outcry from existing volunteers was such that it was soon dropped.

 

If I had the skills or time to go back and search, I think you'll find that @Lineisclear has previously stated that it is acknowledged at the most economical way to operate the NYMR would be with a full time paid staff and only runnnig trains from Pickering to Whitby and back. I'm not sure who is acknowledging that but it does raise more questions about 'the management'.

 

The guidance references the relevant section of ROGS which as you say obliges the railway to conduct a risk assessment and includes signalmen in the same catgory as drivers and shunters. That assessment has to be made by an appropriately experienced assessor. If a signalman had seriously impaired vision, especially colour blindness, poor hearing or mental instability it's entirely conceivable that such medical conditions could put safety and lives at risk. If a railways's management decide to operate on the basis of self declaration they are accepting the risk of liability for the organisation, and possibly themselves, that such declarations may be wrong, or that the individual was just unaware of a condition that might make them an unacceptable safety risk.

 

I've certainly seen him suggest that the most profitable way to operate would be a restricted Pickering - Whitby operation, on minimum railway (and staffing) principles. I forget what was said about how the staff would be procured - though I find it hard to believe that use of employees could be more profitable than use of volunteers.

 

Not quite correct. I mentioned some time ago that independent business modelling had indicated that two trains a day to Whitby, staying there until ready to make one return journey each, was the optimum financial model and could be done using paid staff. I also used terms like "over my dead body" and recognised that such an operation could not be a charity. It would be the ultimate manifestation of running the NYMR purely as a businees but would rip the heart and soul out of qa volunteer reliant charity

 

That is simply not true John.

The only area that has lost employees recently is operations & maintenance (9 employees gained in 2022-23 but 5 employees lost in 2023-24)

However, to make up for those 5 lost employees, the railway has gone from employing 14 people in 2022, to 36 in 2023, to 57 in 2024. And the area? Sales and catering.

 

The NYMR completed a programme which resulted in 14 paid staff at various levels leaving the railway.

 

NO Steve! I'm fully aware of their value and contribution but just don't turn a blind eye to their cost.

 

I'm struggling with this line of reasoning, as it seems very focused on technical legal liability, not actual outcomes.

Without any other factors, this seems an expensive way to address something that could well be achieved rather more economically.

 

Sorry to sound like a broken record on this, but cumulatively your posts do not leave the impression that members and volunteers' value to the organisation is, well, valued.

 

It feels almost less of a step from there to handing operation over to Northern Rail for a 155 Pickering to Whitby shuttle, than it does to running a heritage steam service from Grosmont to Pickering, connecting to national rail services at Grosmont…

Simon