Voting at AGMS

So when it comes to your railways AGM how many bother to attend/vote?

Should you use all your votes?

 

It all depends on whether the AGM is a real meeting that can transact meaningful business, or a stage managed charade structured to perpetuate the status quo.

 

I am usually happy for the status quo to be perpetuated. If it was threatened I suppose I might vote.

 

You can get the situation where undesirable people are co-opted onto the board without members / shareholders getting any say. I make a point of attending the a.g.m. when these people are up for re-election purely to help vote them out, & encourage others to do so as well.

Bob.

 

Out of interest, what voting system do most Railways use? Is it a show of hands at the AGM, a secret ballot at the AGM or a full postal ballot. What arrangements are there for those not able to attend (e.g. because they are running the railway in question at the time!) to vote - proxy, ballot etc.?

Also, how often do new people tend to join the Board and do they tend to be the Board's suggestions or from the memebrship? How hard is it to get people to be willing to be involved in this aspect of the Railway?

Steven

 

A major problem is that many are only interested in the emotional side of things - locos in use, period of representation etc, when the real need is for proper responsible business management which does not have the same immediate appeal to the senses, but which is vital to provide cash flow from sales, and bums on seats, to fund the needs of the preservationists who started each and every project from the very best of motives, but often with no long term business plan.

I dearly hope that I am wrong - but - the preservation world is more than likely to see a catastrophic failure in the next three months, which could probably have been avoided if tptb had been prepared to take on new personnel and ideas rather than circling the wagons.

The agms of the organisations involved have been stage managed nonsenses for over two decades now - nice and easy for the management - but ultimately - self destructive due to issues not being confronted. Hard decisions and alternatives must be dealtwith - not avoided - if our businesses are to survive!

 

Tantalising comments - we'll have to start watching for the vultures circling!

 

Please exuse my ignorance....tptb?


Its ok....found out now.....

 

I can only speak for three preservation societies, one in the UK, the other two in Germany. The German ones might be of lesser interest here.

The one in the UK with 2000+ members uses proxy voting by post plus ballot voting by those who attend the AGM. Turnover of Board members is quite high at the moment with new faces appearing on the Board of 11 people about every two years. Strangely enough there are some people who have been on the Board for up to 30 years, which might indicate that those frighten away newcomers. The Board always has a suggestion if a post becomes vacant. There have been candidates from the membership but there have been very few occasions when those were able to beat those suggested by the Board.

Kind regards

Christoph

 

A thought did occur that those who have been on for 20+ years the arm chair members will more than likely vote for them every time and then it is therefore difficult to get new blood in...

 

Where are you saying then.

 

I agree with frank here, that too many railways have directors with personal and emotional interests at heart, often at detriment to the railway. Popularity contests don't help either.
Railways do need to invest in professional skills and experience, from people who maybe don't have railway preservation at their interest, but that of running a company.
However here I am not talking about a corporate CEO or chairman, those roles are better suited to appropriate experienced enthusiasts with vision, but business strategy, financial managing, marketing, operations, research and product design should be at a more professional level than some bloke who does it on a Tuesday night, who has driven everything in the shed, has a lot of mates and has a sideline business which occasionally sells the railway some services.

I hold Torbay up as a good example.. Just enough of the right locomotives and stock with the right balance of service, good product placement, exploits it unique selling points, and has done it's appropriate research to what the customer wants (there are several small things they do that other kinds don't always heed) and more importantly makes a profit and gives a return to it's shareholders.. For decades.

 

Have you read any of the threads about the Wilcock article on 'preservation leaders without heritage credentials' or indeed the article itself?

FWIW I'm with you on this matter.

 

I too agree with Frank, others and yourself Mr Moderator, this makes an interesting thread and invokes a serious discussion on something that has needed to be aired for a very long time.

I seem to recall from around 8/9 years ago something called the "Telesis" ? report that suggested finding the right volunteer board member for the right job rather than alocating someone to a position because he was a friend etc, I could of course have the wrong end of the stick on this.

May I also add that IMHO the days of volunteer boards are limited without a professional Manager/Director at the helm in these trying times.

Regards
Chris:

 

For many railways the risks associated with the costs may seem unpalatable (or to some people.. "why should I pay for what I can do myself" when they clearly can't..)

Maybe one way forwards is for the HRA to step up it's role.

Many railways will have very similar strategies and can share USP's to their local population.
There are also many aspects of marketing that railways can share (central web portals ie "MyLocalSteamTrain.com" maybe ?).
This could be a shared resource / risk / cost.

But also aspects of coordination...

How many railways let the locomotives drive the promotion ? (i.e. come visit us as we have xxxx running)...

Now in many industries thats classed as the Development driving the Product and selling it to the Customer
When it should be the opposite.. Customer demand guides the Product to which the developers respond.

That means Passengers dictate the train which dictates the required locomotives and stock.

How many railways actually admit that running between October and November, January - February make any money ?, and how many others are running class 5 and above ?
Maybe it be worth while shutting down part or all of the line in the winter months, focusing the volunteers on enhancing the product (Clean, repair stations / stock) and then be fresh and ready for the new season ?

 

Funny how two people can read the same comment differently. I read Frank's comment about too many only being interested in the emotional things, and assumed he was talking about the memberships rather than the boards. A lot depends on which railway you're at, but I think probably the comment is fair either way. I agree with Franks other views too.

There are repeated accusations that boards act in their own interest.Depends what you mean by that. There haven't been very many instances I am aware of, of board members of heritage railways making monetary gain at the expense of their line. So I guess the accusation is that board members follow their own pet projects. Possibly fair in some cases, but how often to the detriment of the railway when viewed impartially, I don't know. Also not sure how true it really is since it is difficult to do anything without the participation and or money of volunteers / members. I think what actually happens a lot of the time is that the board can't, won't or lacks sufficient skill and time, to communicate with the membership in such a way as the reasoning behind a decision is known and understood. But it also has to be said that sometimes, no matter what the board does or says, there will be elements of the membership who don't like the direction, and will be vocal about it.

I agree that election to a board shouldn't be about popularity. However, the difficult thing is that the board has to be the overseer of what attributes it needs in new board members and how they will be appointed. As such it is really easy to appear to be "rigging" the system in favour of their "mates", regardless of whether they really are or not. Perfect democracy hasn't yet been invented.

If people have been on a board for 30 years, and there is a voting system in place, you either have to prove it is rigged, or accept that in fact they are the people that the majority actually want.

One other thought. Most of the work that the Directors undertake is completely unseen by the membership, but no less valuable for that. It is as valuable as the guy who paints the wagon fleet or empties the ash pit. Not more valuable, not less valuable. Just another contribution freely given. But the fact that it is invisible makes it very easy for the members / volunteers to say that so and so does f*** all for the railway, when they might in fact be doing quite a lot.

I am now going to put on my tin hat and wait for you all to bash me....

 

....and some directors are incompetent, don't understand company law & can't manage finances.

Bob.

 

What you say is fair comment 21B, cannot argue with that though your point about Directors being for around 30 odd years means they can become stale and lose the plot.

Is it not time to introduce a system like they have for the American President where they can serve for say eight years then MUST stand down for at least four years before seeking re-election?

Kind regards
Chris:

 

Of relevance are current SVR moves re good governance to limit directors from serving longer than 2 successive 3 year terms. (as they probably would be anyway in the big outside world).

There then has to be a break (one year minimum?) before they can be re-elected.

It also make good sense that directors are elected according to their respective skills/experience so that a strong board would have a suitably expeienced & qualified director responsible for each discipline including:

Infrastructure including p/way
Mechanical Engineering including locos & rolling stock
Operating
Marketing & publicity
Finance
& perhaps others

This might discourage popular but inappropriate election but it would certainly encourage the necessary attention to essential matters at the right level.

After all many heritage railways are now serious businesses (they have to be for survival). The days of running them like a local club need to be well and truly over!

 

(ARPS... do you mean HRA?) It is interesting you mention this ADB968008, as isn't this the duty of an "association", "group" or representation body for heritage railways... are they not supposed to have the remit and are charging membership fees to be doing this already...?!!?

I agree that more needs to be done on marketing our railways as a day out, and providing the tools to our railway's management to assist them to do their job. The typical 80-90% of visitors now being families is our future, we MUST market towards them, connect with the younger generations, and safeguard the vital income we need to keep locos in steam, build new facilities, restore a coach etc etc, all while providing an enjoyable, authentic, engaging, educational and memorable day out.

With regard to committee positions, I feel the EOR method is one way forward; the Company selects the heads of each department (i.e. like a TOC), and the membership society is a representation body. There are proper complaints policy (and if needed a discipline policy), so that issues or disputes can be properly investigated and (if there is a case to answer) individuals are brought to answer and the issue resolved / drawn to a conclusion. The Company recognises that it cannot run the railway without the volunteers input, and takes its suggestions sensibly and communicates regularly the "why's" and "where-fores".

It means that the BEST person for the job is selected, rather than the only person who puts themselves forward or who has the most "mates" turning up at an AGM; there is no point having a person in charge of C&W if he doesn't know the difference between an air or vac pipe, a marketing man who doesn't have the internet or a finance director who is a bit uncertain using Excel! It also means that the "bottom line" is considered before projects are undertaken, and ensures that (for example), projects essential to save outlay, protect or generate income sources are correctly prioritised.... hopefully ensuring the railway is still there in 50 or 100 years time.

I am interested to read the comments regarding your suggestions as to the management of heritage railways, as we take EOR forward towards running steam and diesel on the closest heritage line to London.

Simon, GM, EOR