West Somerset Railway General Discussion

More than two pages is unlikely to get read. Unless you are in teaching, where they seem to prefer a small novel.

 

I did think of the National Trust, but their operations are spread across numerous locations, so I would think they would have no great number of volunteers under each local management, and their management at national level would be mainly concerned with strategic issues and not directly responsible for volunteers.

 

Major sporting events like the London Olympics make use of large amounts of volunteers but not for a long duration in time.

 

A cv is not your life story, clear, succinct, and relevant to the job is key. Detail can come later. More than two pages is very unlikely to get read wherever there are multiple applicants and a multistage recruitment process.

Simon

 

Source at Williton tell me it could be the person who took the drone picture is the same person who objects to the field being in the webcam shot and so no problem.

 

Not true at a site level. Volunteer numbers at a site can be in three figures, and suffer from the same challenges as on a railway of needing to cover both the reasons for their interest and the commitments to the public (opening times, promised services, etc.).

 

Does this suggest that the alleged objector to the south webcam at Williton wasn't opposed to the railway in principle, but merely to being seen there?
No wonder no compromise was found.

 

I would be more concerned about the suggestion that prospective candidates should have a chat with the chairman before applying - it does suggest that the appointments process may be less than entirely transparent

 

It's pretty clear that the ability to work with the Chairman is going to be a fundamental part of this role.

 

I don't find that at all strange. Far better that folk fully understand what they might be applying for before putting pen to paper.

 

It depends on the role but neither SVR's current GM nor its new appointee had prior railway experience, but both have relevant experience including working with volunteers.

Patrick

 

I suspect that would be true for any company or organisation.

 

Nonsense. Two pages is ample for any CV. If somebody at that level doesn't have the ability to cut their own crap, how on earth are they going to make sure the railway is running efficiently and sustainably?

 

Those are both fair points, but the fact people are being advised to ring the chairman directly does raise a red flag for me - well, two in fact. Firstly, it feels as if the recruitment process is basically just "the chairman picks someone he likes"; and secondly, it gives the impression that the chairman doesn't want an autonomous managing director: he wants someone who will do what they are told.

Of course, I might have had my opinion tinged by all the evidence posted previously on this thread and elsewhere that the chairman does not handle conflict very professionally, and "locks out" those who disagree with him with minimal process.

For what it's worth, if you were to apply for a job with my employer and wanted a chat with somebody to make sure you had the right idea about what the job involves, then that's great, that would be seen as a good thing - but our recruitment manager would invite you out for a coffee, *not* somebody you might later be reporting to. But then we have, I think, a particularly solid recruitment process (our HR Head, incidentally, joined us from the railway industry)

Incidentally there was a well-publicised argument recently between a certain museum and a certain preservation group, one aspect of which was: A claimed B had been acting "unprofessionally" and B strenuously denied it. I think that relates surprisingly closely to this: both groups were I suspect writing in good faith but had very different views on what constitutes professionalism. I see things like this advert, read reports on this thread (mostly from Andy Norman) about the behaviour of WSR management, and see posts from senior WSR people on the internet and am left thinking "that's a bit unprofessional" - and let me make this clear, it's by no means limited to the WSR or indeed to railways. I'm sure those people, though, think they are being professional!

 

I've noticed that suggesting a potential applicant can get in touch for an informal chat first is becoming quite common, particularly at the higher levels. If nothing else it can help dispel false assumptions of what the job entails and so get applicants who have a better idea of what would be expected.

The suggestion that it makes the process less transparent would depend on how applications are received and processed. It could also work the other way and result in people not applying - "I don't want to work with him..."!

Steve B

 

I am not a potential candidate, for numerous reasons, but if I were I would not dream of applying, because I have the same opinion (rightly or wrongly).

 

Given the situation the line is in, there may well be a need for a GM who can follow the Chairmans line about what needs doing rather than someone who can develop tings themself

 

The idea that somebody would decide not to submit an application simply because they formed an opinion based solely on the content of this thread is frankly laughable! - but clearly such a candidate would be wholly unsuitable for the very same reason in any case.

 

Clearly a lot of this thread is opinion, however the facts seem to be that

1. The Railway is in a serious situation
2. Many of the senior management team have been removed

It seems to me that unless either this job is the one you have always wanted, or you need a job right now, it might not be the most attractive one on offer.