West Somerset Railway General Discussion

It's because we're used to the idea that businesses are regulated, and that regulators wield some kind of big stick. The reality is that very few businesses are regulated, and that the regulators try to avoid using that stick unless absolutely necessary.

The success or failure of the WSR, or any other heritage railway, may well have an impact on many people who have an affection for the line, or the trains, or whatever. But it's no more meaningful to whether the railway will survive than affection for Debenhams, or Woolworths, or any of the many other mismanaged businesses that have gone to the wall in years past was to their survival.

But, and it's a major but, the HRA is perceived rightly or wrongly as the collective voice of heritage railways. It does have a degree of influence and has provided input to railways (including the WSR) where there have been problems. That sets up an expectation in some minds for how it should respond where things go wrong, and it does raise questions about the impact on the HRA's credibility when it stays silent on a matter. HRA therefore carry a risk to themselves from their (non-)position on the behaviours at the WSR.

But none of that should distract from the reality that problems within the WSR organisation, as at any other railway, are of the WSR's making, and ultimately for the WSR to resolve.

 

I agree, there is nothing anyone can do to make the PLC change direction, Things will have to work their own way to an conclusion, most likely there will be further clamp downs on any dissenting voices, and only people that allow the authoritainical board to carry on regardless will be allowed to work on the railway,
In time either the line will manage to just survive year to year, slowly getting worse, of it will become insolvent, and the inneptitude of the board will be exposed, but they will take the railway down with them, The only option i can see now is for the WSRA to canvass every small shareholder, asking them to transfer their shares to the WSRA, so they can get enough voting shares to nullify the WSRHT's shareholding, and unseat the board, and remove the factions that support the PLC ,This might involve taking action against the WSRHT and evicting them from the railway, if they won't work with the WSRA.

 

Absolutely! As posted before it does expect its members to comply with its Code of Practice and, to that extent, it is upholding standards across the heritage railway and tramway sector.
It's also worth remembering that it's almost totally staffed by volunteers who already have their hands full on their own heritage operations!

 

Heritage Railways are indeed regulated - but it is by the ORR, not the HRA.

Tom

 

Is seaton tramway having the same rules as th west Somerset railway and other railways as when you look at it the track is completely different and doesn’t look like it could be looked after by the same rules

 

Mr Lineisclear sir,

What is your view on the repeated statement that the single charity solution would cost a 6 figure sum to implement ?

 

Maybe you would be kind enough to let us know (3rd time of asking), how the HRA deals with members who do not adhere to the code of practice? If the answer is 'nothing' (as appears to be the case with the WSR HR policies), then what is the point of having the code of practice?

 

I distinguish between the general view of businesses being regulated, and the specific instance of railways being regulated. I would agree, though, that the regulation of the activity by ORR may lead people to consider that the businesses themselves are regulated.

 

It would appear as though the board are attempting to use the Face ache "friends of..." model. Bar, ban, chuck out or otherwise get rid of anyone and everyone who has the audacity to disagree with the decisions that the supreme leader has made. Maybe that will work in the short term but what happens when it starts to go wrong? If they have got rid of all the dissenters who will they blame then?

Perhaps there is an old adage that applies here. It refers to a troop of baboons climbing a tall tree. The leader of the troop and his cronies at the top of the tree looking down are happy because all they can see are smiling faces, unfortunately all those at the bottom of the tree, looking up, can only see a*****oles

 

Part of the answer lies in the names. Seaton is a tramway, the WSR is a railway.
There are fundamental differences in the concepts and methods of operation. For example, a tram could run from (say) MD to DR simply on 'line of sight' - ie it could leave MD if the driver could see there was nothing at DR waiting to come towards him. A driver on a railway such as the WSR would probably get sacked if he did that without first being in possession of the relevant 'token' for that stretch of line.

 

"upholding" sounds good, but in this case it appears to mean providing a set of suggested standards and hoping the various heritage railways follow those standards. Without any form of effective sanction against those who don't comply, it seems little better than an expression of good intentions.

And we know where good intentions lead....

 

If you care to look at the HRA website it is there for you to see.

Clause 2.3 states: Members should have policies in place to provide for adequate safeguarding of children, young persons and vulnerable adults, and to guard against harassment, bullying and unfair discrimination or treatment.

Section 8 states:
CONFORMANCE WITH THIS CODE
8.1. Any allegation of a breach of this Code by a member will be considered by the Board of the HRA and if the Board considers that there is an arguable case in support of the allegation, the case will be remitted to the Code of Conduct Panel (the Panel), an independent body established by the Board to determine such issues.
8.2. The following sanctions will be available to the Panel:
i. Issue the member with a warning as to future conduct which would remain in place for two years.
ii. Direct the member to take specified steps within a stipulated time, a failure to do so causing the matter to be reconsidered by the Panel.
iii. Suspend the member from membership of the HRA for a period not exceeding three years.
iv. Expel the member from membership of the HRA.
8.3. In the event of the Panel imposing a sanction specified in either paragraph 8.2.3. or 8.2.4., the member concerned may appeal to the membership of the HRA at a general meeting in accordance with procedures laid down by the HRA Board.

The HRA will not get involved in any way unless requested to do so. If you want to make an allegation of a breach of the code then go ahead and do it rather than pontificating on here. However, before doing so you should be fairly certain of your facts. It's also worth pointing out that the code uses the word 'should' and not 'must' or 'shall' in clause 2.3 so it is arguably not mandatory, only advisory. Only a few clauses of the guidance state must or shall.

 

Exactly the point I made several pages ago soon after this latest fiasco became known.

As I said then, any comments, criticism or anger should be directed in only one direction, and it's not the HRA's direction

 

Thank you for the reference @Steve

For the record I have no desire to make allegations of breach of code and I have not pontificated about anything, I merely asked a question which is what I thought Nat-Pres was about.

 

To be honest, i don't think that even if the HRA had come down on the side of S&DJRT, condemned the PLC over its actions as regards expulsions, would the PLC have taken any notice, most likely not, most likely you would have seem the usual suspects on Facebook defending the PLC, and telling the HRA to buzz off,
outsiders can not change the WSR, It has to come from with in, and if it can't then there is no hope, and all that can be wished for is that those who have given their labour, supported the railway, put the blame fairly where it belongs, if the hot heads ignore good advise, and just plow on, towards the obvious end, bankruptcy , and loss of the railway as it stands now,

 

The ORR is becoming increasingly interested in (Worried about) the competence of the management of Heritage Railways, clearly the management of the WSR raises what I might call a number of fairly well established issues about competence.

Certainly I understand that they are showing an interest in the line.

 

And would any other members of the HRA be prepared to take questions? I appreciate that certain questions have become b

I was under the impression @Lineisclear was responding as an individual, not officially on behalf of the HRA. As such, you are correct that his participation has been appreciated.