North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

It's hard to be prescriptive about numbers, because the accounts quote headcount, not FTEs. However, the headcount actually fell slightly from 2018 - 2022 (years of accounts, i.e. representing figures from previous years) but then grew rapidly in 2023 and 2024. That growth is largely driven by an increase in sales and catering staff. Quite possibly many of those are seasonal.

Catering income has gone from £1.3m to £2.1m over the time span represented, but with I suspect a large increase in headcount to deliver it. Some of that rise would simply be down to inflation (i.e. selling the same number of meals, but getting more income) - the BoE inflation calculator suggests that £1.3m at 2017 prices would be £1.65m at 2023 prices. So undoubtedly catering has increased its volumes over and above inflation, but looks to be using more staff to achieve that.



Tom

 

I think there was an increase in Moorlander services in recent years.

Jon

 

Thanks to @Jamessquared I think picture starts to emerge.

- inflation has driven costs up since covid, 20%+ is what we all suffer
- overall the railway is employing more people presumably to cover for lost volunteers to some extent
- only catering has grown faster than inflation

It strikes me that the drivers of the situation are primarily external. Whether management are making the best choices is a matter of debate, and whilst there will always be choices and good and bad outcomes, clearly they aren’t really taking everyone with them. It doesn’t look likely they can trade out of this situation without some more significant changes, but I would suggest we need another year before drastic action because this year is shaping up to be the first economically “fairly normal” year since covid.

 

Would not disagree with your logic. What I am confused about is the many comments on here about more use of volunteers in lieu of paid staff.
Does the NYMR unlike most Heritage Lines or volunteer organisations have some "magic mine of volunteers" waiting to take over these paid roles.

Picking up on the inflation point from @Jamessquared, and purely because I have been scanning some images from a 2000 photo charter which I think was £30, but lets say £40. According to that BoE calculator that would be £75.79. Not many charters 9(ny?) floating around at that price, which emphasises the costs lines face now compared to then.

 

Good work there, @Jamessquared What might be illuminating would be similar explorations of the data for other lines over the same period, with the obvious disclaimers about comparing apples and oranges etc etc

 

That seems fair. I think there are then significant questions about the income line for travel, and how it has been affected by the varying strategies around use of Gift Aid.

I’d also be interested in the response to my question about accounting policy for grants, as I remain concerned that performance was flattered by declaring income on receipt of cash, rather than deferring it to match expenditure.

If I’m right, that will both have overstated income (and profits) at the time, and overstate costs (and losses) later.

 

Another illuminating response!

 

I’d want an accountant to comment, as that was categorically not what happened where I was involved in an appeal.

 

44806 on the Moorlander diner service today without diesel assistance.

 

The charity Sorp sets out the rules:

It depends on what conditions are applied to the grant or other source of the income. If the money was given to the charity on condition that a certain activity takes place then there can be deferment but the link must be clearly set down. Thus if I give money to a loco owning charity that must only be used to repaint the loco in sky-blue pink and nothing else the income should be deferred until the costs of doing so is painting it are recognised. If I donate money to help with the restoration of a loco by tossing money into a collection tin, it shouldn't be deferred.

 

It’s a not uncommon effect. Personally I think the way in which charity accounts are presented doesn’t achieve the stated aim of aiding an understanding of the health of the organisation. I suspect that part of the problem is the rules were centred around other types of charity than heritage railways.

What would be illuminating (but quite reasonably not going to be shared) would be the management accounts.

 

Try church accounts...

Thank you, and my thoughts were aligned to the conditions that I'd understood were tied to the YMJ funding.

 

I have. Didn’t like them much either!

 

Just wait till you get to Total Return accounting...

 

It’s usual on large grants for it to be trickle fed in line with expenditure in which case I’d expect both to occur in roughly the same time period. I certainly wouldn’t expect (say) a £2m grant to be simply handed over as one lump sum and thus appear as such on the income side. However, I’m not an accountant, just someone who has administered large HLF grants.

 

The NYMR is in a relatively rural location, so most of its potential volunteers will have to travel some distance to get there. My guess is that the NYMR will find it more difficult to attract volunteers than, for example, the KWVR which is close to the large populations of Leeds and Bradford.

Where a heritage railway has a good supply of suitable volunteers, it will be at an advantage. But where suitable volunteers are not available to cover essential tasks, then those tasks must be covered either by paid staff or by outsourcing to contractors. Because the in-house versus outsourced option exists (for loco and carriage overhauls, IT support, catering, marketing ...), the financial health of a company can only be judged by looking at total operating costs. A misleading picture may result from focusing on staff costs in isolation.

 

Not really sure that the distance from a centre of population is all that relevant. The FR for example?

What is relevant is how well a railway engages the people it has and accommodates them, finding ways to work with the volunteer labour availability that is specific to the location and culture of the place. Some are better at this than others, and that in my observation relies on how well those in charge understand the specific volunteer ethos and culture of heritage railways and their specific line.

 

It hasn't helped the volunteer situation that the NYMR "management" have sold off the volunteer accommodation at Pickering and instead offers any volunteers wanting to stay overnight accommodation miles away in an isolated place at Stape; similarly it has managed to kill off a very active and thriving group at Levisham. Add to that it has also managed to disgruntle and drive away a number of long term volunteer - read the NYMR Volunteers FB page if you don't believe me. On top of that it seems to be adopting the WSR policy of driving away volunteer support groups if they don't start pouring the funds they have raised into the NYMR coffers They're in the process of driving away the LNERCA, how long before NELPG falls into their sights? People management seems to be either catastrophic or non-existent, it seems an absolute farce that a "people manager" has now been appointed!

 

Actual distance is a bit of a red herring. In mileage terms I’m closer to both the Worth Valley and Embsay but in time terms, getting to Pickering is so much quicker outside the chaos of the seaside and other day out traffic but that doesn’t generally occur when I’m travelling.
In any case, distance is not generally a deterrent. A significant number of footplate volunteers live over 100 miles away from the railway with many coming from Kent and even Holland on a regular basis. What is killing off volunteer numbers on the NYMR is the management’s apparent attitude to them. As has been highlighted before, volunteer accommodation is very low on their list of priorities and, if you live more than an hour’s drive away you are not supposed to do safety critical work and travel at both ends of the day. The railway is haemorrhaging volunteers (I’m one of them) because of the attitude and direction of those running the railway.
There is a chink of light, though, as the current PLC chair does seem to be reaching out to volunteers in recent posts on the Facebook Volunteers page, asking them what they would do to improve the Railway’s situation. That has to be good and I only hope that this approach is not stifled by others.