West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I've repeatedly said 'if true' during this discussion precisely because of the lack of confirmation.

I also really, really want to be wrong.

The PLC could also respond to deny the rumour as well. That would quickly put it to bed. (Again, improved communication helping to stop rumours).

Just how are the WSR HR policies these days?

 

If the legality of the matter as open and shut as @Lineisclear is making out, one wonders why such vast sums of money are being spent in arguing the toss. Am I just being naive when it comes to lawyers being involved, or is it perhaps less clear? We can take a good guess that people with legal qualifications and even specialist subject knowledge in the area will be involved after all...

 

I don't understand this.
Surely the HRA wants to be representing heritage railways and groups that are the best in the business and helping them to be the best in the business? If not then it's just a group that doesn't really count for much because it's members do what they want.
The over charging was just an example, I'm well aware that railways can charge what they want, but let's say that on railway X some shady or unfair practice was taking place. Does the HRA just gloss over that because it's stronger with more railways in its grouping? At what point does the HRA dismiss a railway from its ranks?

Look at it from the point of view of being a member of a professional organisation such as the GMC. Does the GMC say, no need to worry about that doctor who has some dodgy employment practices or has been over prescribing medicines, we're all better together and we'll let the Police sort out the misdemeanours? No, they look at it and after due process come to the conclusion that this person does not align with the good standards of the GMC and they are removed. So it should be with the HRA.

 

I just wonder whether, if the reports are true, the allegation of bringing the WSR into disrepute might be considered by one or more of them to be defamatory.

 

I Suppose time will tell, theres been no mension of this on facebook, or gloating from the sycophants of the PLC, as far as I can see, so something must be afoot, because in the past, thats been the first line of attack.

 

Worth going back to the saga of the Ex6 and re-reading the HRA adjudication which pointed out how libellous the accusations made by the Ex6 were to the members they expelled and how 'restrained' those expelled had been.

 

I'm beginning to wonder how much I want to enjoy and consume my hobby, the way things are going.

 

A number of lines are becoming more managerial but not necessarily more professional in their conduct.

Concentration of power in the hands of a few remote individuals, parallel to that a loss of agency for volunteers and fewer checks and balances, as you say a monomaniacal obsession with control. A model which depends on volunteers deciding 'my line right or wrong' and donors who don't ask too many questions. It depends on an almost cult like devotion to 'the line'.

In this pretty depressing picture, I would argue that there are lines which have thus far not gone down this route. They are the ones to be cherished and supported.

 

The HRA has a Code of Practice that its members are expected to adhere to. If there is a material failure to do so the member concerned can, as the ultimate sanction after due investigation, have its membership terminated.

The Code requires that HRA members have in place and follow a disciplinary procedure broadly in line with the HRA's guidance on that subject. As highlighted earlier there is nothing in Law to stop a member from terminating a volunteer's involvement for whatever reason it chooses without the need for due process. That would be a fair analogy to the GMC example. The HRA would be concerned if that were the case. If a member nevertheless conducts a thorough investigation and follows a disciplinary process compliant with the Code then good standards have been observed and there would be no grounds for the HRA to intervene.

 

Out of curiosity, on what basis would the HRA become involved in considering an alleged breach of that code of practice? The GMC is criticised from both sides, but there are a number of suggestions that trade associations can be less than active in their enforcement of their codes of practice.

 

Or until such time as it follows what's currently happening to an unfortunate line in Wales. (I had intended to stay out of this, but your post lit too big a bulb in my head.) Luckily, here too, the trackbed is owned by local government.

Noel

 

This bit bothers me. As volunteers we have to adhere to all sorts of rules and we are sometimes told we are treated as unpaid employees, but on the whim of a single individual we can be fired on the spot. That isn't right.

 

I would agree with what you say here with the addition of the words fair and transparent with regards to both the volunteer dismissal and the appeal processes.
With specific regard to the WSR, it has now been 2? years since the HR policies were removed, so how can the volunteers that have previously had their cards removed and also the alleged new cases, possibly have had a fair hearing, never mind any kind of appeal?
With this in mind do you not agree that the HRA is failing in its duty to bring the WSR into line or remove it from its ranks?

 

I accept it's tough because, as others have pointed out, Trade Associations want to retain their members if possible. Ideally any failure to comply with the Code would involve encouragement to improve with guidance on how to do so. As a general principle modifying behaviour on the basis of lessons learned is preferable to sanctions.
Termination of membership would be very much a last resort but one that could be applied in extreme circumstances.

 

Which is why there are those that argue that volunteers deserve more protection.

 

I'm curious as to how bad a line's management has to be before the HRA stops adopting a Mr Barraclough approach to it.

 

Structurally on the WSR, how do you suggest that could be achieved - particularly given the recent statement from the plc seemingly rejecting the structural reforms you proposed? What form / forum should volunteer influence take? And perhaps more importantly, where now for the Bailey reforms?

Tom

 

Surely that's a matter for the volunteer support organisation for any particular railway. Not suggesting that all volunteers join a union, but there is something to be said about the old 'united we stand, divided we fall' saying, so I would expect their members to stick up for each other and don't understand why that does not seem to be the case with regard to the WSRA. I can only assume that they either know stuff about the situation that we don't, or there is widespread apathy amongst their members.

 

There is , or appears to be a culture of mutual loathing between the various trustee board s and the PLC have taken advantage of it to consolidate their grip on power, We saw as much recently over the election of the WSRHT trustees, vested interests in the shape of the chairman, and others who held positions of power and sat on both the trust, and PLC boards, ensured the reformers would not win, its all about retaining their own personal power, that's also why the reform agenda has been booted into the long grass, to ensure certain peoples own power isnt threatened, by people asking searching questions, and exposing either an agenda that might not have the railways best interests at heart, or exposing their own lack of a plan , if the Steam trust and WSRA had combined, it would have made life very difficult for those in positions of power, as they would have been vulnerable to any attempt to hold them to account.