North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

To pick up on some discussion from earlier today, NYMR registered two trademarks over the course of the Autumn - one is their logo, the other their full name.

Sent from my SM-S926B using Tapatalk

 

X

 

That’s certainly the case with the West Somerset thread. Regular visitors will know who I’m referring to.

 

Where can we see this please?

 

Oh brilliant!

 

Jim. Perhaps you didn't notice that 35 B apologised genrously as he accepted the asserted circularity was an error? In any event HRA policy is a matter for the HRA board where, of course, the company secretary does not have a vote.

 

The NYMR OnTrack site.

 

Thank you John

Which isn't available sadly to us mere Premier Life Members I guess, who hear very little outside of MoorsLine / AGM information, and perhaps going forward might even hear less?

Hope it is interesting to those "in the know"

Kind regards

Andrew

 

Andrew,
I post on here in a personal capacity but I take your obvious point on the chin. I will see what I can do.
Best Wishes,

John

 

Sanctioning a member or volunteer who brings the organisation into disrepute is reasonable. Prohibiting any comment (which might often be favourable) seems asinine, if that really was the intention of the cited notice. In the last few years at least two other heritage railways have sanctioned volunteers for allegedly bringing those organisations into disrepute when what those individuals had actually done was only to publicise what those organisations had done to bring themselves into disrepute.

 

The specific circularity was indeed a confusion between two things. I did however refer to another post, and will note in passing that (a) a company secretary is not without influence in their organisation and (b) that I wouldn't expect someone to cite favourably an organisation they'd got influence in if they disagreed with the decision.

 

No one has suggested prohibiting any comment! Quite the opposite; criticism is encouraged. What can be unacceptable is where that criticism is expressed in a way that, to use the traditional term, "brings the organisation into disrepute" Typically it's populist grandstanding in pursuit of a cause where damage to the organisation or individuals is seen as collateral. As to the two railways mentioned your interpretation of events is far from universally shared.

 

Granted, but plenty of posts on this forum have shared my interpretation. If that really is mistaken, perhaps more daylight should have been shed on the ins and outs of the events.

 

Whatever one's view of what was said, I'd note that one of the dynamics in both situations was an elision between criticism and unacceptable language. That helped create the pressure cooker conditions.

 

i have done as you suggest, but I can see absolutely nothing there that might be expected to drive a surge in passenger numbers. Please enlighten me as to what those measures are!

I'm not registered on the Ontrack site (and probably nor are most of those commenting on here) so cannot don as you suggest. I wouldn't have thought it is secret information, though, so why do you just copy and paste it here if it is such positive news?

 

One issue of concern is where declaring one's disappoval of how an organisation is being run counts as legitimate and constructive criticism and where it counts as denigration. The same posting on a forum may appear one way to one pair of eyes and the other way to another pair.

 

When in employment, one knows or soon learns, that corporations aren't run on democratic lines and to speak out of line whether in an inappropriate way or otherwise is a surefire way to place yourself at a disadvantage. On the other hand, large organisations can provide greater means of pursuing a grievance than has been shown possible via HRA. For me personally, I won't have used social media at all other than LinkedIn whilst in employment because employers will if needed, be viewing what is being said in private postings, especially where jobs may be being applied for. Then there's the mire of security, confidentiality and NDAs signed.

The issue I feel with HRs is that it's difficult to apply similar constraints on those who volunteer their time for free in roles that are a passion rather than a job. Many on this forum give or have given their time and/or hard earned cash to railways that they have cared about for most of their lives. It's only natural to therefore want better from those in command from time to time when things have been seen or perceived to have not worked well.