WSRA Trustee Election Hustings

It would seem to me that the current trustees continue to have a large degree of support from the existing membership - maybe that support is misplaced, but it exists.

I think any rerun of the voting will generate the same kind of response and even if it doesn't the reform candidates will form a minority of the trustees in the unlikely event they get elected.


If I was a member, which I'm not, I would be looking to resign and join some alternate support group.

If the majority of disgruntled members did so, I assume the existing group would start to wither on the vine.

 

With the greatest of respect Robin I believe we have enough information through social media sites now. Lets keep our powder dry and work on emails or phone calls only. I do not, if at all possible, want to be out maneuvered again.
Ken D

 

The current trusteeship would be more than happy to accept resignations from disillusioned members, as weakening the support for reform.If possible we need to recruit more new members in favour of change .As Ken says, the social media/press will be making those who fell victim to one sided propaganda very much aware of the deplorable behaviour of this group. If they had followed Caligula's example and nominated a horse , it would have been elected on the chairs proxy votes.

 

There are, I believe 5,000 members. Some 4,000 expressed no interest. Some 800 supported the current leadership.

Some 200 voted for change.

Good luck with changing the minds of the overwhelming majority. Personally I don't see it happening anytime soon.

 

Since no-one seems to know who Chris Walters is, perhaps that is what happened?

 

I am now back in Yorkshire after attending the AGM on Saturday and have had time to reflect on the events that took place at Bishops Lydeard. I was appalled by what I witnessed.

I saw a Association Manager/Secretary prancing around with her radio microphone like some sort of Prima Donna, there was no doubt that she thought she was in charge and no one else's views mattered including, it seemed, the sitting Trustees. When asked questions from members about voting procedures and what cards should be used etc. her standard answer was 'It doesn't matter because of the proxy votes'. In effect she was saying 'we don't care what you think or what your views are because we know we are going to win anyway'. She came across as extremely arrogant with total and utter contempt for the membership. In my opinion she overstepped her position and needs removing from the position of Association Manager/Secretary.

The Chairman came across as someone who wasn't really in charge of the meeting, his comments seemed rehearsed but he also seemed to be unable to put across his comments even when read from prepared notes. When giving his Chairman's Report, and reading from his own notes, he seemed hesitant and unsure of what he was saying whilst he stumbled through it, it was as if someone else had written the report for him (?). He came across as someone who was not used to speaking at meetings and does not deserve to hold the position of Chairman.

As for the rest of the Trustees on the top table, they displayed total contempt for the membership gathered before them, they came across as arrogant and conceited and, as we now know, were confident in their re-election from the start.

As a fairly new member of the WSRA this was the first AGM I have attended, so I came to the meeting with no preconceived ideas of how events would unfold. To say I was disappointed with the actions of the sitting Trustees would be an understatement, gobsmacked would be a better word. These people need to stand down and let others who have genuine respect for the membership take over. Lets hope that after a few days refection the Trustees will realise this and resign.

On a positive note, it was good to see the various candidates up for election from the opposing groups, come together as one to oppose the Trustees on a united front and 'bury the hatchet' for the good of the future of the WSRA. Lets hope that their differences can be put aside for the moment and that they all pull together. Any conflict between these groups, published on forums or elsewhere, will only give the sitting Trustees ammunition for any future actions.

It was good to meet up with a few of the "Names' from the forum and others connected with the railway I have been in touch with. I also had an enjoyable day on the railway on Sunday and the sun even came out to make the day even better. I look forward to visiting the railway again in the future, under more pleasent circumstances.

Dave Stapleton

 

Ken

Don't worry. Trust me on tactics. Only those elements of strategy that I wish to Trustees to know of will appear where they can know of them, as has happened to date! It is necessary to use some elements of social media for wide communication.

My three requests to WSRA members, however disgusted they were by events on Saturday are:

(1) Hang in there, maintain your membership. Have confidence that the 'reform' candidates are working together on the situation.
(2) Write to the WSRA Trustees to express how you feel about them, and
(3) Come to the resumed AGM if you possibly can - it will be worth it

kind regards

Robin White

 

It was a moment of utter chaos. Not the way in which such an election should be conducted. I fear that she was right in that even if the proxy holders were added to the members actually present in the room, more voting cards had made it into the box than should have done, so the checking of them was inadequate as had been pointed out during the (flawed) process. That only happened because of the chaotic way matters were handled. In some ways it may have been better that events have demonstrated that the election was an utter shambles than to have had one lone new Trustee elected. If enough of us lean on the mountain, it will move.

Being a member of the heritage railway movement for as long as I have has needed a lot of faith on occasion. But so rewarding!

kind regards

Robin White

 

I see the latest edition of the Journal lists two new WSRA (Promotions) Ltd committee members. One of them is a Mr Peter Chidzey and the other is a name I do not recognise. There has been no announcement about these appointments AFAIK.

Curiously the relevant WSRA website page (contacts) does not reflect these appointments. That page still lists Richard Knight as a Director even though he resigned the post in February 2013!

Are these mystery names real people or were the cardboard cut outs on a buy one get one free deal?

Barrie

 

Crikey, so it does. Someone with the same name is listed on LinkedIn as fairly local and is a "chief information officer" ;-) I missed that completely! I've had no instruction to update the WSRA webpage.

Steve

 

Like many that have followed this and the other WSR thread, for me there has always been a gut feeling that there would be little, if any change taking place. Intransigence seems to be to the forefront here and of course apathy (look at the the figures quoted by Simon) in many forms of modern life seems to be the order of the day.

Not being connected in anyway with the WSR basically I have no axe to grind as such, but do have an opinion . However, I do share the real sadness - desperation for some maybe - of those wishing for an orderly and well run association must presently feel.

If I were a member of the WSRA I believe I would resign and become part of another, less unpleasant in direction but more supportive group, on the WSR There seems to be lots to be done - as there always is on preserved railways.

 

WSRA have a 'chief information officer' ! Well, blow me down with a fevver (or words to that effect).

Barrie

 

Might not be the same chap, Barrie. But keep your eye open for a feather or two...

Steve

 

According to a free company check site I use (which is usually pretty accurate), there are three current registered directors, which are as on the WSRA site but omitting Richard Knight, who it has down as resigning in early 2013.

 

From the detailed figures on Robin's latest update of her notes, using the precise numbers per David Randles' recording of the meeting, the 3 Trustees seeking re-election had between 532 and 574 votes including proxies, the recently co-opted Trustee 310 and the 2 remaining candidates 258 (Jeff) and 268 (Steve).

Whilst the message must be that those seeking change had not managed to convince the armchair members who make up the majority of any Railway membership body, the figures are nothing like as stark - or hopeless - as you suggest.

Having heard a little more about how the votes were cast, I do now see it would have been possible (though perhaps unlikely) for Jeff to have reached the 301 first quoted, and I do wonder if the proxies exercised by members present other than the Chair were correctly accounted for on the second vote.

As an outsider, I can only add to the calls for those thoroughly disillusioned to hang in there - the WSRA is an organisation with a net £2 million assets and any attempt at a replacement would be starting from Nil. It must be worth trying to change what exists - but reaching out to the entire membership would seem to be the key to achieve that.

Steven

 

Steven

Thanks

Reaching out to the general 'remote' membership is exactly the idea. The great positive from the meeting on Saturday is that it will now be impossible to disguise the fact that the Trustees have lost the support of the day-to-day working membership. No one regrets more than I that this element of 'dirty washing' has to appear in public but we need to use every available channel to explain to the 'remote' membership the position that has been reached. Any useful suggestions in that regard gratefully received. The 'reform' candidates and their supporters have put a lot of thought into that but none of us are too proud to be grateful for help and assistance.

kind regards

Robin

 

I for one would like to add my sylph like figure to the weight to lean on the mountain........ or thinking about it perhaps I could manage on my own. lol

 

I'm not at all sure if being referred to as King Canute's press officer is a compliment or an insult! But I have worked in the PR business for 35 years and managed some very sticky situations for various people and organisations in that time -- I wouldn't like to be the WSRA's PR man today though..........

 

Dick

A compliment, of course. You are the only professional PR person I know who looks rather like a Viking!

kind regards

Robin White