Five volunteers SUSPENDED from NYMR

[009 micro modeller]

4 hours ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

I suspect the policy might have been that the locomotive needed to be in FR ownership to become part of the Ffestiniog Railway's operational fleet. When the ALCO arrived in 1967, the FR had at least two privately-owned locomotives on its premises, the Quarry Hunslet Britomart and the 20/28hp Simplex MR 8788/1943 (later to become The Colonel) but neither of these were used on FR trains. When its owner died in 1982, The Colonel became FR property and was used by FR civil engineers.

In that case I’m not sure what the rationale for the policy was (I don’t think they have that policy now do they?).

[Jeremy Cumberland]

I have no idea what current policy is, or if there is one, but leases, loans and other long-term agreements to operate a locomotive the railway does not own are now widespread on many heritage lines. This was not the case in 1967, and perhaps the railway saw ownership as the only option for a front line revenue-earning locomotive. In any case, the locomotive required a substantial modification to the cab to fit the FR's loading gauge, and perhaps the FR wanted a free hand without having to deal with a possibly interferring owner.

[RJS1977]

I believe that "Palmerston" is not directly owned by the FR, so I presume that condition no longer applies.

[pheaton]

On 23/11/2023 at 21:45, figworthy said:

 

I am not a lawyer.

 

30+ years ago, I had the dubious pleasure of having to track down owners of abandoned boats at a sailing club.  In some cases, they existed in the club records, and I was able to contact the last known owner (who invariably turned out to be the current owner, who had "forgotten" to pay for its storage), but in other cases, the trail went cold, letters were either returned unopened, or lost.  I spoke to the RYA's legal department, and they had some standard advice on what to do.  I can't remember what it was, but I suspect that it won't have changed much.  There are a few lawyers hereabouts, perhaps they can comment.

 

Adrian

This has actually been tested already more recently in the preservation world....with none other than 45015 languishing (still) at the battlefield railway.

 

In the early days of preservation...newly established railways were fairly liberal with allowing people to bring various vehicles of sometimes dubious quality, and in some cases questionable use because they needed items of rolling stock to attract people through the door and put themselves on a map....and back then things were fair lax...a bit like the health and safety at the time 😀.

 

Now for wagons that generally wasn't too much of an issue the problems came later when...space started to be at a premium...and for more useful vehicles (mark 1s) to come in....something had to give... or the wagons generally end up forgotten somewhere (just look at cheltenham racecourse south hunting butts) on google earth ;)

 

Coaches however...were a bit more hazardous anyone preserving a mk1 sleeper and indeed quite a lot of mk1s and some DMUs...were in for a nasty shock if they proceeded to pull panels off! and its at this point some railways were starting to pay more attention to what was on there site...

 

Whats this got to do with 45015...well it had the dubious honour of being the last 45 out of toton....it had been tipped over more times than pint in your local pub, and it had been pretty robbed of every single useable part....but someone decided to preserve it anyway...as with everything sometimes...plans overtook ambition...and it was left....and left and left...

 

now normally a railway will draw up a restoration agreement....this effectivly bounds the owner to agree to work on the asset (in this case 015) and have it either presentable or useful within a defined timescale....(generally time isnt enforced as long as the railway see's progress)...part of the agreement is...when all else fails....you have to pay rent....(sometimes by the metre) for some reason ( dont know the ins and outs) the railway took action for money due...it went to court, the court found in the railway favour, and after various toos and throws....015 was taken in lieu of payement.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by pheaton

[adb968008]

On 28/11/2023 at 10:28, pheaton said:

This has actually been tested already more recently in the preservation world....with none other than 45015 languishing (still) at the battlefield railway.

 

In the early days of preservation...newly established railways were fairly liberal with allowing people to bring various vehicles of sometimes dubious quality, and in some cases questionable use because they needed items of rolling stock to attract people through the door and put themselves on a map....and back then things were fair lax...a bit like the health and safety at the time 😀.

 

Now for wagons that generally wasn't too much of an issue the problems came later when...space started to be at a premium...and for more useful vehicles (mark 1s) to come in....something had to give... or the wagons generally end up forgotten somewhere (just look at cheltenham racecourse south hunting butts) on google earth ;)

 

Coaches however...were a bit more hazardous anyone preserving a mk1 sleeper and indeed quite a lot of mk1s and some DMUs...were in for a nasty shock if they proceeded to pull panels off! and its at this point some railways were starting to pay more attention to what was on there site...

 

Whats this got to do with 45015...well it had the dubious honour of being the last 45 out of toton....it had been tipped over more times than pint in your local pub, and it had been pretty robbed of every single useable part....but someone decided to preserve it anyway...as with everything sometimes...plans overtook ambition...and it was left....and left and left...

 

now normally a railway will draw up a restoration agreement....this effectivly bounds the owner to agree to work on the asset (in this case 015) and have it either presentable or useful within a defined timescale....(generally time isnt enforced as long as the railway see's progress)...part of the agreement is...when all else fails....you have to pay rent....(sometimes by the metre) for some reason ( dont know the ins and outs) the railway took action for money due...it went to court, the court found in the railway favour, and after various toos and throws....015 was taken in lieu of payement.

 

In the old days it seemed much simpler, if you had an undesirable onsite  you’d find one of…

 

1. tool van or subject moved someplace in accessible or at opposite ends of the site.

2. mysterious break in and theft of parts, years later seen on a different restored loco, that acquired them somehow from Barry.

3. spontaneous combustion.

 

it usually starts with a “No” to any request, followed by gradually increasing messaging hinting by various messengers.

 

preservation can be a right grubby place.

 

 

 

 

 

[TheQ]

Most sailing clubs have the rule written into their rule book that any boat with unpaid site rents, will be sold if the owner cannot be contacted, or has been contacted and doesn't pay up.

 

What my own club does is move the boat on rent being unpaid, across to a least favorable mooring / parking area.  Then if there is no outcome from contact attempts , after a specified period of grace, which quite long , iirc a year, sell off the boat.

If there is a difference between owings and value to the former owner, then that will be returned to the former owner if they ever turn up.

It's also in the club rules that the club can move any boat for any realistic reason. Mostly that's site maintenance.

Edited December 6, 2023 by TheQ

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On 23/11/2023 at 21:45, figworthy said:

30+ years ago, I had the dubious pleasure of having to track down owners of abandoned boats at a sailing club.  In some cases, they existed in the club records, and I was able to contact the last known owner (who invariably turned out to be the current owner, who had "forgotten" to pay for its storage), but in other cases, the trail went cold, letters were either returned unopened, or lost.  I spoke to the RYA's legal department, and they had some standard advice on what to do.  I can't remember what it was, but I suspect that it won't have changed much.

Much as TheQ wrote above, it was very well organised by the yacht club when I had to deal with a recently widowed friend's affairs, among which was her late husband's debt to the yacht club for storage of his boat. On hearing that he died of a devastating dementia, and subsequently receipt of his death certificate; since none of the family were interested in the boat it was sold by the club, all his debt from the date of diagnosis of his dementia was cancelled, and thus the widow received a useful sum of money. Very decently and efficiently conducted, a good experience..

[vikingsmb]

On 06/12/2023 at 09:40, TheQ said:

Most sailing clubs have the rule written into their rule book that any boat with unpaid site rents, will be sold if the owner cannot be contacted, or has been contacted and doesn't pay up.

 

What my own club does is move the boat on rent being unpaid, across to a least favorable mooring / parking area.  Then if there is no outcome from contact attempts , after a specified period of grace, which quite long , iirc a year, sell off the boat.

If there is a difference between owings and value to the former owner, then that will be returned to the former owner if they ever turn up.

It's also in the club rules that the club can move any boat for any realistic reason. Mostly that's site maintenance.

That is correct, and its under RYA rules regarding abandoned boats 

[Michael Hodgson]

I take it that's different to claiming a vessel under salvage laws?

[Fishoutofwater]

5 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I take it that's different to claiming a vessel under salvage laws

To claim salvage the vessel must have been in peril. Difficult to argue that a vessel at anchor in a marina is in peril!

[Boris]

This is the follow-up article:

 

 

North Yorkshire Moors Railway volunteer group 'effectively disbanded' following six-month suspension of work and ugly dispute with management

It seems almost ridiculous that goings-on at a respected heritage railway have to be discussed under cloak of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

 

Yet this is now the case at the North Yorkshire Moors Railway, which earlier this year was forced to discipline seven long-serving volunteers – one of whom has been reported to police – over an ugly saga at Levisham Station, where it was feared that a 60-strong group of unpaid workers were operating independently of management. Their activities were suspended last summer and they have barely returned since.

The accusations, revealed by The Yorkshire Post last month, were myriad and often bizarre – an official report published by the railway included details of a poster being defaced, locks superglued and keys removed. The volunteers at Levisham – who call themselves ‘Wombles’ – were alleged to have been illicitly charging fees for the use of a NYMR-owned cottage intended as overnight accommodation and to have carried out work on a turntable without permission.

 

There has subsequently been outcry, and several members of the railway, some of whom have been involved since the 1960s and 70s, when it was in the embryonic stages of the transition from a Beeching-mothballed mainline between Pickering and Whitby to the preserved railway it was to become, have contacted The Yorkshire Post to refute the allegations made by senior management. They speak of wider discontent and a culture clash between experienced enthusiasts and a corporate establishment which has come to dominate operations.

 

Fifty years ago, heritage railways were the domain of hobbyists, who in the early years had to re-lay lifted track, restore carriages, source locomotives and then operate services themselves, acting as driver, fireman, guard, signalman, stationmaster and more. Naturally, this state of affairs has evolved over time as health and safety restrictions and professional obligations have come to the fore. The NYMR is now run by paid staff, many with experience in the rail sector, with the support of a vast army of volunteers. It is a tourism behemoth within the North York Moors National Park, drawing in visitors who, for the past 15 years, have been able to travel all the way to Whitby, beyond the original Grosmont terminus, on steam trains thanks to an agreement with Network Rail that depends upon a commitment to modern safety standards.

So it perhaps unsurprising that the first generation of volunteers are now starting to drift away, some through ill health, others because they simply no longer relate to what the railway has become.

At Levisham, one life member with experience dating back to the 1970s said that the volunteer group has now effectively disbanded, as the mass suspension invoked in June has never been lifted. They have met socially since then, but most have not set foot on Levisham’s platforms since. The tearoom they ran is closed and access to the cottage they had enjoyed as grace-and-favour accommodation for 40 years has been revoked while renovations take place.

 

"Nobody from the NYMR has ever spoken to the wider volunteer group. There was no due diligence (before action was taken which resulted in the suspensions). Things have changed a lot and we feel there is an endgame, a bigger plan, but we don’t know what it is. It seems they just don’t want the group to exist any more. They set a trap and we fell into it.”

 

The source adds that the group – who were ‘hands on’ and completed numerous projects themselves – regularly reported their work to head office, and were not part of an ongoing dialogue advising them not to carry out certain jobs.

"There was no advice along the way, we were just left to carry on, then things came to a head and they suspended all work. We were given three days’ notice to vacate the cottage. The suspension was initially for a month, but we’ve heard nothing from the railway since then.”

Those familiar with the line may wonder why other volunteer groups at stations such as Goathland and Grosmont have not been targeted in the same way.

Advertisement

Hide Ad

"They are not as large in number, and we worked differently – we did everything ourselves. We’d tackle the permanent way, anything really.”

The NYMR’s investigation report into Levisham, which was passed to The Yorkshire Post, confirmed that five volunteers had been either banned or ordered to retrain, but since its publication, a further two have been singled out and disciplined.

"One of the original five, who was accused of threatening behaviour, turned out to be a case of mistaken identity, so they banned another man instead – yet his suspension has never been lifted. The seventh was a woman who spoke passionately in defence of us at a meeting in September.

"As my work has been suspended, I consider myself effectively suspended. This isn’t just friction between one or two people on each side, it’s become railway policy to get rid of the group. The group is finished. Our blog has been taken offline, we’ve had to pass our donations account back to the railway under veiled threats of police involvement.

 

"It’s gone too far now. Quite a lot of the Wombles will just walk away. We don’t know what the future is for the station. The management will fix things that break, and they’ve been cutting the grass, but the weighbridge and tearoom are closed. It’s an attack on all of us.”

His concerns are echoed by a representative of the Levisham Station Group, who wrote to The Yorkshire Post following the publication of our original article in November. His letter was co-signed on behalf of all the suspended volunteers.

It read: “A forward plan of works has always been presented by the group to the management and agreed upon. For last 30 years any works we have done have only been done within this authorised plan.

“If the management had found fault in our actions why did they never discuss or even raise these concerns? None of the management team, senior or middle, have come to Levisham Station to discuss any concerns they had. To interpret their views we had to rely on emails - sent by us to them - which we have never received acknowledgements for, let alone replies to.

Advertisement

Hide Ad

“As the report concludes, there are many issues that should be dealt with by the leadership and followed though.”

Two married couples who are part of the group also wrote to our editor, and have signed their names. Tony and Janice Leary and Malcolm and Doreen Townend have volunteered together for 17 years.

Their letter stated: “No discussions were ever held between management and the whole station group before these suspensions were made. If they had been then the problems could have been resolved and a way forward found.

"During our years of service we have found the whole of Levisham Station group to be friendly, supportive and caring – that is the main reason we kept volunteering there for 17 years. The station group have assisted other station groups with several projects over these years and been dedicated to the railway. Many other Levisham volunteers have decades of service to the railway without ever being told of any problems.”

 

A Yorkshire Post reader and supporter of NYMR from the Whitby area also contacted The Yorkshire Post to express his concerns. Ian Wilkin wrote: “I was shocked at the way these volunteers were treated by management and concerned that they were not given the opportunity to present their version of events. Most of the individuals who have been banned/suspended have no idea why this has happened and have had no opportunity discuss this with management.

"The issues here highlight a wider problem. Volunteers play a major role in the day to day running of this country, giving their time and expertise in a whole range of roles. Unlike employees, volunteers have no trade union representation and are not protected by employment legislation. This leaves them vulnerable to mistreatment and bullying by management and full-time employees.

"Reputations have been shredded, mental health issues have arisen, long-term friendships have been strained and police time is being wasted. These volunteers should remain innocent until sufficient evidence is provided to find them guilty.

"The current management regime at the railway seem to have forgotten that the railway was set up by volunteers in the late 1960s, with many of these people dedicating most of their life and spare time, over many years, making the railway what it is today. These newer staff have scrapped the original ethos which built the railway and are now scrapping the volunteers who helped to create it.

 

"The heritage steam railway is being transformed into a multi-million pound theme park with little regard for the original aims of the hard-working individuals who rescued it from oblivion in the late 1960s and early 70s.”

What does the North Yorkshire Moors Railway say it will do next?

When asked, the NYMR management’s spokesperson said it had ‘declined the offer’ from seven volunteers to work for two years, after which they can submit a renewed application.

A further meeting with the wider Levisham Station Group will be held in January, where an update on the work suspension is expected to be given.

Advertisement

Hide Ad

The NYMR said that in future, volunteers at all stations will operate ‘within a framework agreed with their staff point of contact’.

The cottage that became the subject of dispute between the management and volunteers is currently being renovated, but will be available again to all ‘eligible’ volunteers in future.

.

Related topics:North Yorkshire Moors RailwayVolunteersWhitbyNetwork Rail

Edited December 17, 2023 by Boris

[Northmoor]

It sounds very much like there were one hundred right ways this issue could have been addressed, but in the end it was none of them.

[Boris]

I mean the fact that they suspended someone for asking awkward questions speaks volumes about the management culture within the NYMR.

[Boris]

Op-Ed from the Yorkshire Post - I think this has gone way beyond any sort of mediation now.  After al open ended suspensions have been the preferred method of the NYMR for quietly getting rid of people they don't like for a while now, they suspend you and then immediately delete your account to both of the companies official communication portals to volunteers.

 

Value of North Yorkshire Moors Railway volunteers mustn’t be forgotten - The Yorkshire Post says
Heritage railways have a unique character that makes people so fond of them. It is why so many volunteers offer to give countless hours of their own time to keep these historic assets operational.
The Yorkshire Post
By The Yorkshire Post
Published 16th Dec 2023, 16:45 GMT
 

It is also reflected in the interest in the goings on at North Yorkshire Moors Railway (NYMR), which earlier this year disciplined seven long-serving volunteers.

NYMR feared that a 60-strong group of unpaid workers at Levisham Station were operating independently of management and their activities were suspended last summer.

 

Now those volunteers have hit back refuting the catalogue of allegations made against them.

Whatever the reality is, this whole sorry saga does nobody any good. People in Yorkshire are rightly proud of NYMR and don’t want to see this drawn out.

The whole saga has been mired by a lack of transparency. Ultimately, that’s what people want - transparency.

But above and beyond, mediation needs to be the priority between the volunteers and the management of NYMR. All of those who have been disgruntled by this saga need to get around the table and clear the air.

 

What must not be forgotten is the value of volunteers. Without their passion, assets such as heritage railways would not be where they are today.

That is certainly the case with NYMR. Some people who have contacted The Yorkshire Post have been involved since the 1960s and 70s.

The transition from a Beeching-mothballed mainline to the preserved railway it has become today, which has captured the imagination of so many people, wouldn’t have been possible without their efforts. NYMR’s management needs to ensure it engages with these volunteers

 

 

 

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, Boris said:

The seventh was a woman who spoke passionately in defence of us at a meeting in September.

 

1 hour ago, Boris said:

I mean the fact that they suspended someone for asking awkward questions speaks volumes about the management culture within the NYMR.

I don't know if this is the same person you're referring to, but the latter doesn't necessarily follow the former.  The individual may have spoken passionately in the people's defence or asked awkward questions on one occasion but if they broke the nomal rules on another, that could be what they've been disciplined for.

[TJ52]

My wife and I had planned to visit the railway next year. Don't think we'll bother now.

 

Terry

[Boris]

9 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

 

I don't know if this is the same person you're referring to, but the latter doesn't necessarily follow the former.  The individual may have spoken passionately in the people's defence or asked awkward questions on one occasion but if they broke the nomal rules on another, that could be what they've been disciplined for.

I know the person involved and they have done nothing of the sort, its literally to gag them.

[Jonboy]

2 hours ago, Boris said:

I mean the fact that they suspended someone for asking awkward questions speaks volumes about the management culture within the NYMR.

when I used to volunteer for a non rail related organisation that also had a big legal compliance regime there was a small core of experienced volunteers who would never accept an answer unless they liked the answer, and would ask it again and again and again, and then claim the management were avoiding awkward questions when they stopped replying…

 

One example was as simple as the organisation’s national insurance agreements having slightly more people needing food hygiene certification than the base legal standards (event manager who was legally responsible for the whole event needing one as well as the catering manager) and a member of the wider local management team sent over 50 emails asking why as her employer hadn’t needed it….

 

 

[Boris]

7 minutes ago, Jonboy said:

when I used to volunteer for a non rail related organisation that also had a big legal compliance regime there was a small core of experienced volunteers who would never accept an answer unless they liked the answer, and would ask it again and again and again, and then claim the management were avoiding awkward questions when they stopped replying…

 

One example was as simple as the organisation’s national insurance agreements having slightly more people needing food hygiene certification than the base legal standards (event manager who was legally responsible for the whole event needing one as well as the catering manager) and a member of the wider local management team sent over 50 emails asking why as her employer hadn’t needed it….

 

 

In this case they asked why the railway was in breach of its published disciplinary procedure and by this point the suspensions had gone on for 4 months, and also queried certain line items on the accounts that people didn't want to answer questions on because its a whole other can of worms.

Edited December 17, 2023 by Boris

[Northmoor]

7 minutes ago, Boris said:

I've invested 30 years of my life into the place and left for family reasons last year.  Personally I'm hoping that now that bald bastard has left to destroy Bovington as he's done with the NYMR it will eventually get better, if a new broom arrives and drains the swamp I'd consider supporting them within the next 4-5 years, if they promote from within watch the place self destruct instead.  At the moment don't give them a penny as it will be literally spaffed up the wall to pay the ballooning top heavy wages bill.

I don't think describing someone who is clearly identifiable in those terms exactly helps your otherwise perfectly reasonable argument.

[rodent279]

I've never volunteered on a railway anywhere, with any of the 3 railway preservation groups I've been a member of (the NYMR being one of them), apart from 2 or 3 times on a sales stand off railway premises.

I've been tempted to, quite a few times, but given the tales of woe emanating from 3 or 4 of the largest, most well known railways, I'm struggling to see why I would now. I'm getting the impression that there is a large underbelly of discontent in most organisations, but some are better at keeping a lid on it than others.

 

Has social media perhaps contributed to the amplifying of otherwise small issues that would usually be handled locally, but now get blown up and get out of hand before anyone gets chance?

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

Has social media perhaps contributed to the amplifying of otherwise small issues that would usually be handled locally, but now get blown up and get out of hand before anyone gets chance?

Nail, head, etc.

[Oldddudders]

There is an old adage that it is unwise to mix business and pleasure, and that is essentially where heritage lines find themselves now. But even within such enterprises it is nothing new - I first heard of disgruntled volunteers feeling usurped on a NG railway in Wales more than 50 years ago. With the serious financial commitment that most heritage railways now represent, it is no wonder the pros and the vital volunteers often see things differently. 

[jjb1970]

I do think social media has a lot to answer for (yes, I am aware of the irony of making such a statement on social media). I  find it magnifies ill feeling, has been wweaponized and has exacerbated the existing problem of new media to reduce everything to simple soundbyte type posts and rage/clickbait. I  closed my Facebook and LinkedIn accounts and never got involved with Twitter/X and have no desire to change that.

 

 

[jjb1970]

The Bovington connection is worrying, Richard Smith (the director who is leaving) had that hard to find mix of sound commercial experience and acumen combined with a genuine passion for and love of the museum subject (in this case, tanks).