What is the situation regarding children volunteering at a railway ?

If you want to take your kids to volunteer with you at a railway, What is the minimum age they can do so (with you supervising them) ? How did you/they find it ? What did you give them to do etc. Basically interested in any experience people have of taking their own kids along to help out ?

 

Ah, something different to the usual "there aren't enough young people in preservation" type threads! You may find this parliamentary report interesting.

When I started almost 6 years ago the "rule" (which it turned out didn't have much basis in reality) was 14 to be supervised by a parent or other close relative, 16 to be supervised by any other volunteer and 18 on your own. The 14-16 bit has since gone out the window, and is actually illegal under the horrendously out of date 1920 Children's act, but various bodies have made it clear that they would not prosecute under this. However the question of insurance is still a shaky one and in recent years many railways have decided they don't want to risk it. Even 16-18 is still a bit vague. The whole thing is a bit of a minefield and needs a legal overhaul, as that report recommends.

As for what to give them to do; literally anything. I happened to be interested in painting but We had a couple of 16 year olds join us learn to weld, and I was offered the same but turned it down. I feel confident that if I'd wanted to, I would have been accepted to help anywhere in the C+W works. It all comes down to who's prepared to supervise and teach and impart knowledge effectively, and how much they trust the young person.

 

I believe at least one of the magazines ran an article along these lines recently. The ORR stated they would never prosecute a Heritage Railway using sub 18 volunteers, but as you say the ever risk adverse insurance industry seems to have a different view and has killed it off at a lot of lines I believe. I also think HMG said they have no plans to update the 1920's Act you referred to.

 

The railway will also have to have a new Nominated Person as "Child Protection Officer" - even if the juniors are being supervised by their parent/s. That requires some (not much) training. Also anyone working with or coming into contact with the youngsters will have to have had a DBS check (formerly known as a CRB).
It all opens quite a regulatory can of worms...

 

It might be an idea to have a look at railways that have a track record of welcoming child volunteers and could be drawn on to develop ‘best practice’. I know that lines like the Ffestiniog have been welcoming kids on parks and gardens weekends for 30+ years. I’d assume that they are not unique, I also assume that they would be on the ball regarding legal requirements etc

 

I had a rather interesting conversation with someone at Mendip Rail about work experience many years ago.

Basically EVERYONE who might come into contact with the child/young person needs a CRB (or whatever its called) check.

So that means not only the staff in the works, which is do-able but any driver from wherever on the network who might walk in having driven a train to Torr Works

IE basically they cant

 

Are you sure about any of that? I'd like to know where the legal requirements are?

 

As with the earlier post, are you sure or just believing what someone has told you ?

 

Well, I was interested in the idea for my oldest son, and that was the reason given why they dont.

I'm afraid I am not familiar with the legislation myself

 

It is now quite complex on who you are and are not allowed to run DBS (not CRB anymore) checks on, the following is in the government advice document, my comments in bold,

"An activity is regulated activity in relation to children if carried out: • in one of the following establishments; (railways not listed )• frequently (once a week or more often), or on 4 or more days in a 30-day period; (a lot of volunteers may do less than that) • by the same person, engaged in work for or in connection with the purposes of the establishment; and (therefore not one person on a one off day)

 

I personally am not convinced either by that suggestion, otherwise even on railways that run dedicated youth groups every single volunteer on the railway would have to be DBS checked in case they happen to come into contact with them.

 

I think the legislation was changed some years ago because, under the old rules, someone making ad hoc presentations to school pupils, perhaps [for example] on Road Safety/Cycling Proficiency, etc, would have to have a [then] CRB submitted by/carried out by, every school that they visited, which is clearly nonsense. The CRB check was in the 'ownership' of the organization rather the person to which it related, and therefore, not transferable/disclosable between organizations.

 

What are your fears, molestation or injury?

If a vulnerable person is in regular contact with an individual then both parties need to be aware of the situation, along with those in close proximity.

If it is injury, standard factories act etc. Surely?

 

On the Bluebell, we have the 9F club for volunteers aged between 9 and 16. Checking the web page, it says:

"The 9F Club has a safeguarding policy, all adult supervisors are DBS checked and all members sign, and are required to abide by, an annual behaviour agreement."
​

The railway has an overall formal Safeguarding Policy and Safeguarding Officer, which covers not only volunteering, but also any interaction with children and vulnerable adults (for example, as visitors). According to the policy, there is no requirement for a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check to be carried out for employees or volunteers that are not directly involved in a regulated activity. There are specific instructions for particular areas, notably the 9F club, the Education and Museum team (who are typically responsible for school visits) and the departmental mentoring schemes, which in some cases have a requirement for DBS checks in some circumstances.

Tom

 

The DBS check / certificate is now 'owned' by the individual not the organisation.

Having Child Protection Officers (Which can be a director or manager or any responsible person) are still (I believe) a requirement as someone has to take responsibility for ensuring the rules are met

There will be a 'catch-all' phrase in there somewhere as it is impossible for them to list every possible scenario. The basic rule I had to follow was; Someone in regular contact with the young or vulnerable should be assessed as to the amount of contact, the situations in which that contact occurs (i.e. alone or with others close by) and the frequency of the contact and then decisions should be made as to whether a background check would be appropriate.

The onus is always on the hosting organisation. If something does happen then they would be required to show how they have complied with their Duty of Care (that wonderful phrase again) in protecting the individual.

Note also that there are two levels of DBS. One is for general occasional contact and the second (an Enhanced DBS) would be for hospital staff, care workers, school staff etc. who could have much more trusting relationship with the individual

 

There are actually four types of checks, basic, standard, enhanced and enhanced with barring.

 

Thanks for the clarification. It's been a while since I've had to deal with these

 

The Heritage Railway Association have a guidance paper Ref No: HGR-M0300:Working with Young Volunteers which may be of interest.

 

What? Young people don't just turn up when they want, do most anything where labour is needed whether they have had training or not; go to the pub and drink with the adults at lunch time, come back and carry on until you feel like knocking off?


No wonder there are labour shortages.

Phone? That'll be the 1970s asking me to come back