West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Unfortunately, history is against you on this one. The whole WSRA debacle was a result of leaving the various parties to it and thinking it would work out just fine.

Although Yorkshireman may seem to be OTT in his demands for information, it remains the case that, in these days of electronic communication, it takes almost no time to keep supporters of the railway up to date with events. Lack of time is no longer an excuse for lack of communication.

Whilst no-one needs to be updated on the minutiae, since the last email sent out by the WSRA, we have had a report in the press about the railway being "closed for three months by the ORR". Surely it is not too much to expect another email explaining what this is about and not have to come to Nat Pres to wade through pages of recriminations, speculations and observations, not to mention being bombarded with inexplicable partially visible adverts swirling in the margins.

 

I thought that we were meant to learn from history?

With regards to the explanation, there was one on the 6th November by the chairman http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm which explains the basics and should override the press reports. The press report from memory only did a copy and paste from an article on WSR.org.

 

I suggest that a monthly update to the outside world is more than sufficient

 

I believe the saying is "The only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history."

 

Perhaps the WSR saga epitomises the whole problem of "communication" ? The current Board obviously feels the need to act - and act quickly - whilst accepting that there is some information that needs to be kept within the WSR for both commercial and political reasons. Mounted against this is the demand by many for more information simply because it is possible to receive it but without any value to them other than to "be kept in the loop". Perhaps it is time to both understand and accept that information is a privilege and not a right hence the responsible persons / elected officers will have to decide what should - and shouldn't - be put in the public domain. If that causes problems then the elected officers can be de-selected at the next AGM but that is a decision for WSR shareholders to make and take.

Having spent nearly 60 years working with computers (starting with the early IBM LEOs) I am aware that information "overload" is a major problem not yet identified as the problem I believe it to be and the constant search for information - for no other reason than to have it - is one that the WSR is currently suffering from. I hesitate to offer advice but perhaps the WSR need to make changes in terms of its internal procedures is also a good time for many critics to question whether their constant demand for information is part of the distraction that has led the WSR into its present situation by diverting the management team from managing the railway in order to manage the many criticisms that seem to surround it.

 

Information overload? Probably not. But unreasonable expectations of what is possible, almost certainly.

 

Correction, " demand by one or two noisy individuals". Agree with the rest of your post.

 

It's not about 'rights' (a word that makes me grind my teeth, frankly), it's about what's best for the railway.

Noel

 

I don’t distinguish between those who are volunteers and those support the railway in other ways. Not every supporter is able to volunteer for veryvalid reasons. Others, such as myself buy shares or buy items from the shop. Customers are also supporters and each contributes to the railway. A number of people have made “private contact and quiet requests” and have got no answer. That is not just the present case but has gone on for years. A number of people made “quiet requests”, for years pointing out serious shortcomings on safety issues but were also ignored. It has benn endemic and the appointment of the new Chairman gave hope that things might change. Sadly things don’t seem to have changed. I hope the new Chairman will reflect on how to harness the goodwill not only from volunteers.

 

I don't think he's been in the post long enough to warm the chair has he? You definitely seem to not want to give people a chance to sort things out.

 

I would suggest that the lesson we learn from history on this one is that sometimes it is not enough simply to assume that the people in charge know what they are doing and that they should be left to get on with it.

In which case, given the ease with which an email can be sent out, why was one not sent out like the one on the 25th October?

I don't think wanting to be informed of what is behind something that appeared in the press about the railway can be classed as wanting "more information simply because it is possible to receive it but without any value to them other than to "be kept in the loop".

This and many other replies appear to be simply saying in many different ways " we can't tell you everything, so we needn't tell you anything".

 

The problem is that frequently the wrong lessons are learnt from history or the lessons from history are forgotten. Or in the worst scenarios, people who should know better choose to ignore the things history teaches us.

 

Do you expect to receive daily operations notices then, or PTS training, or copies of rosters, or face disciplinary measures if you break a rule? On a purely practical level, volunteers are always going to be more well informed than any other kind of supporter. I still don't understand exactly what it is you want. We've had two letters from the chairman, and we know that in addition to that, volunteers and staff have had a full and frank briefing. Like others, I don't expect to hear much other than "progress is being made" until March, and as a supporter, I'm perfectly satisfied with that. I suggest you're in a very small minority with how much information you are demanding a right to know. And given that you are obviously well connected with volunteers, I'm sure if it bothers you that much you can find out what went on, then everyone's happy.

 

There is a fundamental difference of kind between staff and supporters, for all that the two categories overlap. I gave the example of a runaway that led to a collision above; as a supporter, I received less from the GCR even after the RAIB report than is already public domain as requiring action at the WSR. Were I to have been staff (including volunteers), I would have expected to have heard more because of the impact on my job.

That is the blunt truth about entitlement to information.

There is a different point, where I drift towards your corner. There are a number of ways of handling adverse publicity; the ostrich posture is rarely the best of those. There was scope for the WSR to have been more forthcoming; an opportunity that appears to have been missed. However, loudly demanding that on a public forum does not appear supportive.

Given your frustration built up over years, you have my sympathy. However, I suggest that you take your reward for prompting action as the fact that there is activity, and let the rest lie.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I accept that it may not be in the Railway's best interests for too much information to be given, but the board must give out enough to maintain the confidence of supporters' (volunteers, shareholders and just folk who buy tickets now and again) and wellwishers. Otherwise people start speculating and spreading rumours = unnecessary alarm and despondency. However, the fact that services are being operated over the Christmas/ New Year holiday period tells me that the Railway is not in a dangerous state. Most steam railways do not run public services during January, and not all operate during the February half term; most operate on selected days only in March. So, a gap till 1st April to do the necessary 'spring clean' is not all that dramatic. Just a pity about postponing the planned gala in March; I hope that not too many people have made non-refundable travel and accommodation bookings.

 

I think by and large they are doing that, as a well-wisher and occasional supporter I certainly have confidence in them. I've only seen one voice expressing the opposite, quite vociferously...

 

What I am saying but obviously not getting across, is that if you look at the press releases they give very few facts apart from that the ORR visited, and the board have taken action by closing the railway for three months. As an experienced, and successful businessman, I would expect the new Chairman to realise that his letter to staff would be bound to leak and give rise to speculation. He could have, and still can, issue, a more forthcming statement to supporters. That should take no more than an hour of his time or he could delegate someone like Robin White to draft it. Quick cheap and easy. There is a wealth of goodwill ready to be tapped. Blaming the leakers simply not credible

 

I don't think anyone's blamed the leakers? What has actually been leaked? The initial letter was clearly written for a wider audience, I imagined that it was simply released to volunteers first as a courtesy, which makes sense to me. It so happened that it ended up being in the public domain just a little earlier than intended. If you refer to those asking the ORR to come and take a look, I don't think anyone can blame them for doing that, clearly the concerns were justified.

 

As far as I can tell, no-one "leaked" anything.

Steve