North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

I’m sorry but I regard that as a somewhat silly reply to a serious post. Have you been a railway GM or Director or Trustee?

It isn’t about creating bureaucracy it is about understanding how a place works and addressing where it doesn’t. We are discussing a railway that seems not to be functioning as well as it might, and generalising a bit about HR as a whole. Tough to manage and especially so if not understood.

 

I've also been involved in a policy review - I get all the best tasks as a volunteer.

What's really interesting about that exercise is that the reviews do very little good in themselves - but they do have a habit of flushing out where there are real problems

Meanwhile, and to the point made by @21B, I've been in a situation where someone has been a volunteer and a trustee, and that confusion of hierarchy has caused problems. As trustee, they've challenged what's been presented, but as a volunteer they've been part of inputting to it. The individual concerned has a very back & white view of the world, so managing that tension and the need to wear different hats has been difficult.

 

Out and about on the line this afternoon. The afternoon Whitby steam service was packed and there was plenty of activity in the sheds.

44806, the 9F and 29 were all out and about. Omaha was steaming outside the shed nicely.

The membership scheme is good especially for those of us local. Without it I would probably do a couple of trips a year max. Now I can travel
Pretty much unlimited and will always spend £5-£10 in shops etc.

 

Have noticed that the 0920 off Pickering is diesel most days, is there a reason for this? I would have thought that would be the one train that would have steam on.

 

Well whoopie doo. In answer to your question , yes to two of the three. I was also a senior manager in a large government run organisation that responded to every problem by introducing another layer of management to the extent that planning and progress meetings that had comprised four or five attendees frequently increased to twenty plus. More resources went in and outputs fell. Had it been privately funded it would have failed.

The last thing I would advise the NYMR directors to do is to take any notice of this website.

 

Well you have far more experience than me at adding useless layers of management. I don’t. I have taken a few out though.

Why do you bother to read and reply if you hold so little interest in the discussion, especially as you seem not to actually read what has been written? I cannot recall anyone suggesting that more layers of management were required. My observation to be clear was that they are under managed, meaning that the structures aren’t well defined the processes can be absent and often people carry the title “manager” but in fact are not.

 

This has been raised somewhere up thread, but I think it's because to put steam on that you need to send a paid fitter to go to Pickering to Fitness to Run the loco. There's also a general shortage of steam currently, and you couldn't use something like 29 on that diagram.

Though, I agree, that train should be a priority for steam haulage if nothing else is. Even at least stick a steam on for the Whitby section would be good.

 

I don't think that's a new development necessarily - on both of my first Moors visits (October 2012 and April 2013) it was 31128 on the first train out of Pickering... and it was absolutely glorious. The guard tried to apologise to me for it being diesel on that first trip but I couldn't hear him over the thrash up towards Goathland with the windows wide open and rain coming in. I'd only been back into this hobby for three months at that point, and it's stuck in my memory just like my first trip of my 'second' rail enthusiast life, which was 7827 out of Goodrington on the Dartmouth. Both times I had the front bay to myself with something making an awesome noise up front, amazing scenery all around, just thinking 1) it's incredible that it's still possible to enjoy this heritage machinery in the 21st century and 2) what a lot I've missed when pretending I wasn't really into trains for the last decade and a half.

That said, I accept that I was probably the only person on that NYMR service that day who was glad it was diesel and if I'm being unselfish I absolutely think that particular service should be steam where possible. The S15 and 45428 were out that day too and were also fantastic, incidentally.

 

Going back a couple of pages, a handful of thoughts on the Diesel Gala from the outside -
- A single Class 20 is an interesting choice; they're often hired in pairs (and very popular as such). How does a single chopper manage up the bank on the NYMR?
Also, I think I'm correct in saying that the one that attended this gala is a former resident of Wensleydale so maybe the Yorkshire-based Diesel lovers had already red-penned it?

- That class 14... I don't know what's going on with its livery but it looks like the cab of a loco in mint undercoat has been stuck on the body of a different one to make one good runner of two. Although unusual for a gala guest, maybe not particularly a desirable one?

- 37250 is a very popular engine, but again, the NYMR already have two 37s and 250 is resident at Wensleydale and was previously at the KWVR gala in 2024 so plenty of chance for the tractor fans to bash it. I suspect if 31466 was in service, a double-header would have been very popular.

- Speaking of the KWVR, Kieran there seems to be the master of a diesel gala lineup. Don't know how he does it.

Finally - 47077 was back in service for the gala, but I don't recall seeing it used on normal services so far this year (seems to have been almost exclusively 37s) - is there a reason why? And what of the rumours that it was being fitted to go to Whitby? Is 37688 currently the only Whitby-passed diesel on the line?

EDIT: It has just occurred to me that I wonder if the proximity to the KWVR gala *is* the reason the NYMR event was relatively poorly attended?
The Worth Valley diesel gala is by all accounts always a top event, and this year offers a Deltic (cult following), Class 50 (cult following), and a pair of Railfreight-liveried Class 31s, a preservation first I believe, amongst the other attendees.

The cost of living is biting, so I could absolutely see northern diesel fans having to make a choice and leaning towards Keighley.

 

A fitter is only required at New Bridge if a steam loco is running right through to Whitby because that’s what the rules for operating steam on the network require. I’m too far out of things now to know what the actual reasons are for a diesel on the 09.20 but the later start time would save a crew as what was the P1 and P3 turns could be combined and stay within 12 hours.

 

My observation is that NYMR are doing precisely what you so rightly objected to when in government - making structural changes without properly understanding the impact on the ground, or what that is doing to the effectiveness of the organisation. Evidence for that can be seen in the disconnect observed by former volunteers, and in the varying accounts of a growing headcount despite declining results.

Understanding that cardinal error, and building board structures that embrace those volunteers and use them properly, is critical. One of the subsidiary challenges will inevitably be balancing the positions of trustees and managers, as @21B has described.

My opinion, based on my experience elsewhere, is that a major part of the problem is that trustees/directors in volunteer driven organisations are expected to do three things:
1. Their normal volunteering
2. Acting as an operational management board
3. Their legal duties as directors/trustees.

Setting aside that (1) often leaves little spare capacity, there are likely to be tensions between individuals' roles at each level, especially if in doing (1) they are working for a manager who reports to them at level (2) or (3). I've several times had to think carefully "which hat am I talking through" in my professional life, and have experienced the conflicts myself.

The answer is not to wish them away, or to build new structures. It is to acknowledge that they exist, and to try to streamline the organisation as much as possible so that those tensions either don't occur, or are able to be managed.

One formerly prolific poster here, trustee at NYMR and adviser to HRA, has instead taken a different position on which volunteer input, as volunteers, is considered a problem to be avoided if at all possible - with structures designed to achieve this. The results where I've seen it have been poor, and prone to injecting conflict where it's not needed. Comparisons may be odious, but other railways with the same issues, and following the same broad legal path, have dealt with those challenges AND maintained positive engagement with their most loyal supporters.

 

As is well known NYMR policy is not to engage on social media but to communicate through other channels. However I think I can make an exception when statements made about my personal vies that are

 

As is well known NYMR policy is not to engage on social media but to communicate through other channels. However I think I can make an exception when statements about my personal views are represented as fact that when they are totally untrue and without any foundation. As a regular working volunteer on two heritage railways I’m very aware of the value of volunteers and fully support the initiatives the NYMR has taken to encourage volunteering such as the volunteer forums and free membership for volunteers. The process of electing trustees has resulted in a situation where a substantial majority of the trustees are current working volunteers ,including all those elected last year. It really would be sensible to check the facts before jumping to conclusions and allowing prejudice to distort the truth.

 

It is good to hear that working volunteers make up a strong proportion of the board. I don’t doubt for a second we have only a partial view here of any heritage railway. I think that many posts are not aimed solely at the Moors. I hope that many of us here are out of date with what happens on the ground now.

All that said, we do see posts here that come from people who have concerns. While we may all be guilty of jumping to conclusions (I know I am), I am reminded that the rule of thumb adopted by MPs and campaign groups is that for every person motivated enough to write an email 100 to 200 others think the same or very similarly. Even if in this context the ratio is more like 1:25 , it might indicate an issue from the number of posters here (perhaps also elsewhere). Communication seems to be misaligned somewhat between management and volunteers if there is any truth behind what people who perhaps would know have been saying.

 

John,
You are indeed correct in saying that a majority of the Trustees today are working members but that was not the case a couple of years ago when the appointments board effectively denied volunteers the right to stand in favour of outsiders who were deemed to have expertise in other skills such as muesums and charities; people who had no idea about volunteering or heritage railways. That led to a significant backlash from the volunteers which, fortunately had some effect with last years appointments.
@21B is also very right in saying that for everyone like me who has walked away from the railway in disgust, there are many more who agree but continue because they enjoy what they are doing and tolerate the way the railway is being run. I haven't visited this year but on all my visits last year, everyone I spoke to moaned about it, both volunteer and paid staff.

 

Thank you for the clarification, which is appreciated.

However, I stand by my comment. The key phrase was “as volunteers”, where you have taken a robust position on the interpretation of charitable objectives and the inappropriateness of taking the volunteers’ interest into account when making policy. That has included multiple reiterations of this where the role of volunteers as stakeholders (whether donors or those doing work) has been pressed. My position is unambiguously that volunteers and members represent a major and specific constituency, which should be embraced every bit as much as professional qualifications.

 

That's unfortunate.
The obectionable statement was that I personally regarded volunteer input "as a problem to be avoided if at all possible". As a working volunteer for the last 20 years I take strong exception to that unwarranted slur. The evidence is very much in the opposite direction with volunteer input being encouraged through volunteer forums and recognition of their vital contribution through free membership, complimentary tickets and thank you events such as the one held at Whitby last year.
As a charity trustee yourself you will know that a clear focus on charitable objectives is a fundamental duty of all trustees so I make no apology for that. However, I'm delighted to agree that volunteers and members represent a major and specific constituency. As the prime mover of the incorporation of the promotion of volunteering into the NYMR's charitable purposes I suggest your description of my position is about as far wide of the mark as it's possible to be.

 

The timetable hasn't really changed though and the 09.20 was almost always steam and then diesel onto Whitby. 9F back today so maybe it may change tomorrow.

 

Thank you for that, on which last paragraph I’m delighted that we agree.

As regards the disputed wording, I think each of our positions are clear and we will need to agree to disagree on the significance of “as volunteers” in the interpretation of my post.

More generally, the point on which I suspect we will also have to accept we will never agree is over how broad or narrow an interpretation can be made of charitable objectives. I suspect our fellow posters will not wish to rehash that debate so I won’t extend it further here.

 

The 9.20 from Pickering is intended to be a steam service but alas there are not enough working steam locos available. If this changes then steam will appear but this seems unlikely in the forseeable future.

Peter