Heritage Railways, are they in trouble, generally?

Tom makes a good point re the management support of wagon groups and it certainly does encourage the volunteers to see that "their" railway does care about the wider aspects of heritage and education - as to the major function of railways was/is(?) in the movement of freight. We are very fortunate on the GCR of having that support, as the great number and wide variety of our working wagons clearly demonstrates....and Yes - I am biased!
Also the GCR is still going Forward with its steady growth in "Bridging the Gap" between the GCR and GCR(N) to make an 18 mile railway..... and aspirations longer term, of double track to Leicester North and hopefully a museum complex there.

 

Thirty years ago I was head of the science and technology faculty of a large community college when radical and, in my opinion, idiotic changes to the national curriculum for technology were made. This led to the removal and scrapping of all our machine tools, forges, brazing and welding equipment, etc. It happened all across the country.

 

There was myself and two of my friends who drove through to Leicester to do the welding/fab class.

Our school still had most of the equipment, which made it all the more frustrating that we weren't allowed to use it.

 

But see there enough enthusiasts who want to take on the responsibilities or difficult decisions of directors?

Do they have any similar ideas experience away from the heritage railway? Many volunteers get involved in heritage railways as an antidote to their paid careers.

I'm not sure that an enthusiast director would necessary be any better at keeping morale high. Their particular interests, preferences and friend groups may have far more impact than a more independent non-enthusiast "outsider".

 

I think you’re missing the point. Someone has to drive the morale, and it pretty much has to be someone who actually understands the volunteer because they have been one …. At the coal face. It is a rare person indeed who understands volunteerism within the railway sector and who hasn’t been one.

 

The trouble with that approach is that volunteers can do marvellous things, but can also do terrible things.

If a mindset of "only volunteers can understand us", you run a huge risk of missing critical matters - H&S, safeguarding, insurance, solvency all will not care about the volunteer status.

It's not an easy balancing act, but it is that, a balance.

 

I’m just going from my own experience where I believe we have been at our strongest when the company chairman in particular had come up “through the ranks” (and indeed in recent cases hand maintained their normal volunteer roles). Where things have slipped have often been when the chairman has come from a different background.

Of course it is important to have a leavening of outside ideas, and you always need in any team someone to challenge the orthodoxy. But I’ve seen issues where someone comes in, and tries to change things in ways that just won’t work, or tries to drive change at a pace that doesn’t match the pace a volunteer organisation can move. That is when morale suffers.

Tom

 

You’re not seriously suggesting that volunteers and care for those matters are mutually exclusive? That’s rubbish, many places those matters are taken care of by volunteers. You don’t have to be paid to be professional in conduct.

 

Why do you suppose that a director who has come up through the ranks of volunteering will not understand those issues? Many volunteers will have had significant business or public service careers where those issues are everyday concerns. So I see no reason to assume a director coming by that route will ignore, or be ignorant of, such matters.

By contrast, my experience is that directors that have come without that background often fail to understand the pace at which a volunteer organisation can work, and often fail to understand the many and varied motivations of volunteers.

Tom

 

In the early 90s we had considerable difficulty in retaining and recruiting teachers with the necessary skills. Many traditional CDT teachers disliked the new D&T National Curriculum and were leaving, and teacher training institutions were adapting to the new curriculum which had much reduced craft skills. In addition H&S considerations were severely limiting what students were perceived as able to do. There are obvious parallels with heritage railway volunteering and the involvement of young people especially.

 

A five star post there @21B.
The thread seems to have gone off at a tangent right from the start but one of the things I was hoping would come out of it was that not every railway is failing and there are plenty of them that aren't. About the only posts that have been on topic were No.16 by @Andy Williams where he mentions the KWVR, GWSR and F&WHR and post no.21 by @gwralatea which sings the praises of the Talyllyn. I'll certainly agree with that last one. Surely there must be more?

 

Hi Steve
I thought that my two posts #32 and #41 were positive and supportive of the GCR in particular?

 

Bluntly, that says that the role is either not essential, or can’t pay for itself. It’s a view that a genuinely commercial organisation would take, especially if finances are tight, and it shouldn’t be a shock to a charitably oriented organisation.

I’m in no way denigrating the difficulty of finding volunteers, especially for onerous roles. But the assumption that they can always be paid for is a dangerous one that needs to be very carefully examined.

 

My point is "can", not "will". My personal bet on the failing of a preserved railway will come from a fatility in a workshop where a volunteer ignored all the training/codes etc, gets themselved killed and lands the organisation with a £1m+ fine.

If (as has been said by others) that "only" a volunteer will understand, that creates risk that the views that suit the volunteers will take precedence over good HSE practice.

We've had that near-miss with the toilet floor on the south devon, and the incident with a chap suffering life-changing injuries falling from height (can't remember where). Spin the wheel enough times and the number will come up if you let it.

You certainly can get volunteers who see the other issues, but not all.

To take your point about morale, forcing everyone to undergo necessary H&S training will not be popular, but the consequences of not doing are potentially much greater.

 

You have misread my post. The argument you say I posted is rubbish, but it's not what I said.

 

You’re missing the point about maintaining morale, and confusing morale with popularity. My point isn’t that a director who has come through the ranks will avoid doing a necessary thing (like proper H&S practices) so as to maintain morale amongst volunteers. Rather, that when you have to do difficult things, it is easier for “one of us” to make the case than an outsider. My thoughts were more along financial than other decisions, but I still feel that making difficult decisions is about bringing the staff (paid and volunteer with you) and that is an easier task for someone steeped in the culture.

A director who consistently chooses just to make what they perceive as popular decisions won’t actually last long if those decisions are not in the best long-term interest of the railway.

Tom

 

It would be hubristic to think everything in our garden was rosy, but I think we have a lot to be proud of at the moment: locos undergoing really intensive overhauls, a new build wowing the crowds, some interesting C&W projects, track being relaid, a flourishing museum and archive etc. Of course, when it comes to railways making regular financial losses year after year, we are hardly exempt, but I feel it is off the back of doing the basic maintenance right. I’d be worried if we were making a loss and also not repairing the track, carriages etc.

Of other railways, a difficulty of being a volunteer is I don’t visit many. But two years ago I visited the North Norfolk, and was very impressed; in particular, everyone I spoke to even casually just seemed to have a real pride in the place, and that shone through. The place felt loved.

Tom

 

The chap who suffered life-changing injuries falling from height was actually a member of the full-time paid staff on the railway concerned. Volunteers are no more likely to have an accicident than paid staff. In my experience there is absolutely no differentiation between paid and volunteer staff when it comes to the implementation of good HSE practice. Statistically , the next fatality in a heritage railway workshop is just as likely to be a paid employee, as it is to be a volunteer.

 

Reluctance of volunteers to accept safety restrictions that would be normal for employees can be a challenge especially for any of those of “I’ve always done it this way” tendency. The risk is not just for the heritage railway involved but for the whole sector. If heaven forbid such fatality were to occur in circumstances where blame could attach to a railway’s management the potential reaction could well be tougher regulation and increased insurance costs for everyone.

 

I don't think you'll find many volunteer roles even outside steam heritage where you won't have to undergo relevant H&S training these days. To volunteer at a Care Home it was mandatory, wasn't allowed to move someone in a wheelchair until I had done the training. You will find it embedded in organisations rules that it has to be done whether paid or volunteer.

Sent from my SM-A556B using Tapatalk