East Lancs Railway

Some highlights from the 1940s Weekend

 

Complete with period attitudes?

 

1939-45 wants it to be remembered that women were encouraged *in* to work, though I suppose the ‘1940s’ weekend includes post-war years when that was reversed

 

I'd imagine that, while women were encouraged to work during the war, there was still an abundance of misogynistic attitudes (and worse) towards them

 

There certainly was. My late mother signed up for clerical work in an aircraft factory WW2 and experienced it. She was very scathing of some of her male colleagues...finding them somewhat idle. She also managed to catch a German spy too, after being told "not to be silly" when she drew her suspicions to her boss. Apparently, that didn't go down well too...

 

Latest bit of madness from a chairman who looks increasingly unhinged and unfit to run a railway...

 

Question, given the legislation that Heritage Railways operate under can they ban someone from travelling? If so under what circumstances?

One perhaps for @Robin Moira White

 

I suspect that it's entirely lawful, in that a landowner may refuse access to their premises.

It is also awful.

 

East Lancs isn’t a land owner though, the line is owned by several local councils.

 

As long as it doesn't breach the Equality Act.

 

I'm not convinced that this act is because of any particular protected characteristics, rather than good old fashioned vindictiveness.

 

You called?

The supply of goods and services is subject to the Equality Act.

Offering trips on steam trains or operating a pub or cafe, is ‘supplying services’.

(E.g, ‘women (or gypsies, or Christians, or atheists) are banned from our railway / pub / cafe’ would be unlawful)

IF this step has been taken because of a complaint about discrimination, it will be unlawful victimisation.

In Joanne’s case, this seems likely to be true.

More awfulness, AND potential unlawfulness.

Anyone from the HRA listening?

However awful the WSR have been to me, I haven’t been banned from the premises, just from volunteering (yet?).

 

A good reason for anyone with scruples to avoid either railway and demonstrate to them the error of their ways until the pain is sufficient for them to change

 

Thanks

BUT the ELR operates under a LRO/TUWO/Whatever authorisation and is subject to the various bits of legislation relating to railways.

I would assume that there must be an either implied or explicit requirement to carry anyone who turns up as a passenger subject to various excepts eg drunk, disorderly etc

 

Im in the US right now so missed some pertinent information but if it is related to Joanne's original case, I'd say they've got themselves into some murky territory id simply not get into.

 

There is no such obligation.

 

Thank you

 

What about barring people from shops/pubs? Is there any legality attached to this?

 

Pubs and shops are private property so you can "invite" in whoever you want, or bar them if you see fit. As @Robin Moira White says, this also applies to railways. Legally ok, but from a PR point of view, there's only so many times they can shoot themselves in the foot.

 

Just the same. If you do it for a discriminatory reason, then it is unlawful discrimination.