North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Why the negativity? The original comment was raised as a postive suggestion for improving volunteer engagement but with , I would have thought, the obvious risk that if a long list of vacancies keeps re- appearing it implies that the necessary volunteer resource either isn't there or is unwilling to get involved. In that event the confidence that can be undermined is that of existing volunteers and paid staff.

 

The point is though that those on the ground - whether volunteer or paid - will already know that volunteers are scarce and there may be some key gaps: they just have to look around. So by the course of action you suggest, you aren't running the risk that those on the ground lose confidence because there is a long list that remains unfilled - they know that already. Rather, they will lose confidence due to the seeming unwillingness of the leadership to engage with the problem, which is far, far more demoralising.

Tom

 

Sorry, Tom I don't agree that the knowledge of where the gaps are is as widespread as you suggest. I seem to recall it was an earlier post of yours that highlighted some specialised roles that few would be aware of. Many volunteers or members of staff would know about gaps in their areas but might be unaware of shortages in others.

 

Hold On! I made the suggestion in the first place! Yes the NYMR has also run successful volunteer recruitment days and advertising volunteer vacancies has to be sensible. If they're filled that's great but it surely can't be contentious to point out the risk that if they're not and the railway has to keep appealing that may affect the confidence of those already engaged.

 

But it won't. That's a problem that doesn't exist. The volunteers you have are not about to stop because they suddenly learn from a renewed recruitment drive that other departments are short. Be serious.

 

If the railway advertises for particular volunteer roles and receives no responses then the rest of the railway can at least see that “management” are making an effort.

If we take your attitude, a vacancy gets a couple of adverts in-house and then gets dropped for fear of eroding some unspecified confidence.

How do you think it makes the remaining volunteers feel?

Management paid lip service in filling the roles and now don’t care about the rest of us who are trying to cover the gaps.

And I suppose your next action would be to recruit yet another employee to fill that role?

Has the railway ever thought about training people up to cover shortages? Or if it’s a particular specialist job, how about a mutual agreement with another railway to borrow someone (if everyone is in agreement)

There are plenty of ideas out there - you just need to be open minded enough to give them a try.

Honestly John, sometimes I think you would rather the railway fail than actually listen to the great unwashed commoners, or veer away from your book on “Heritage railway management 101”

 

I did indeed highlight that as a trend on our railway, and wondered if it there were a similar trend elsewhere. But I don't see the need to advertise for such roles as a weakness or worry; rather, I am happy that the railway is taking a structured view of what skills it needs to continue to function (including many skills outside the traditional operational / restoration roles) and is proactively trying to fill those gaps.

Again, why would you see it as a problem that a railway is undergoing near continuous volunteer recruitment? If you have, say, 1000 active volunteers and they stay on average 20 years, you still have to find 50 new people a year - one per week. So of course it is a continuous effort.

I'm sure you will protest your innocence ("Why would I dislike volunteers, I am one myself") but this just feels like further evidence of your management-level distaste for volunteering as a core component of what heritage railways are about, and what they need to function. Is recruitment of volunteers an issue? Yes (though probably no more so than recruitment of paid staff into what is a challenging industry), but your prescription seems to be "everyone will be depressed if we say how challenging it is, so instead we'll just keep quiet".

You have to trust your stakeholders to be adult enough to appreciate when things are challenging, because then they have the opportunity to rise to that challenge. I've seen people move mountains when required and when they have been properly engaged. But what doesn't work is to maintain that everything is rosy right up to the point when it isn't, and then expect people to move mountains. You have to bring your stakeholders along with you: of course you celebrate the successes, but also be honest about the challenges. Pretending that those challenges don't exist until it is too late is a strategy for failure.

Tom

 

How do you calculate that the recruitment campaign was successful?
Is it through having an amount of bodies sign up on the day for 1 department or an equal spread across the board?
Was there a presence on the day of representatives of each department or was there just 1 covering a number of dept's?

 

I think this sums up your outlook neatly, but with rather more wording, revealing you as a "glass half empty" person!

 

The LNERCA always used to try to have a representative present (not sure if it still does) and we were pretty successful in recruiting people, perhaps because our workforce is well motivated and happy with what was being done, and we tried hard to welcome and integrate newcomers.

 

I used to represent PW but not received any notification that an event was to be held for the last couple of years.
I think one of the recent ones had Station groups, Lineside conservation and S+T done by 1 person and no PW.

 

I’ve been involved in the heritage railway volunteering game for over 60 years and I learnt many years ago that the average volunteer will not step up to fill a vacancy. After all, why should you? Unless you have a particular desire to do so you are not looking for a job. You have to get to know your volunteers and target them. In the case of the NYMR I have done several jobs other than my role on the footplate from cleaner to driver. The first was as secretary of the long defunct footplate department. I’ve also looked after footplate rostering and been on a volunteers working group and footplate inspectorate. Outside of railways I’ve been secretary of the village hall. I never volunteered for any of them of my own accord; after all, why should I? I was simply approached to do these jobs and said yes. When doing footplate rostering I soon learned that people didn’t necessarily jump in to fill vacancies but would happily do so when asked. You need to get to know your volunteers and target them to do jobs. It is totally different from seeking someone in the world of employment so don’t expect advertising for vacancies to work.

 

An interesting observation Steve. It's sometimes suggested that if you need a volunteer look first for someone who's already busy volunteering. Your experience suggests that's sound advice.

 

If those stories are not true, why doesn't the management react to them and tell everybody what is true?

 

I would start by ensuring that decisions and plans are explained, and that volunteers feel they are being listened to. Can I also point out that engagement means you have to generate a sense of shared ownership or common purpose if you prefer. IF the discussion here is reflective of the reality on the ground, then the board and the management must first accept that they do not have that at present.