North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Have the membership been told the reasoning behind the change of pricing structure and the choice of days for closure?

It would be nice if the management shared their reasons for their decisions.

Why are Easter and Spring Bank Holiday weeks a five-day week? That seems surprising.

Will the teak stock run this year?

 

Oversimplification! The view I (and others I talk to) is not "volunteers good, paid staff bad" but rather one of "volunteers good, too many paid staff bad"! There is a balance to be struck, and big part of the NYMR's problems is that the balance is swinging ever more in one direction. The NYMR now has a full time volunteer coordinator, I believe - perhaps one of their tasks ought to be training paid staff to appreciate and handle volunteers properly and well, and monitor how well they do so.

 

I think that is more your interpretation of the posts than the reality of what they’re saying.

 

If we go with your thinking, then when someone leaves you will have a period of time when no-one is trained to do the job. If my volunteer job is as a fireman, but I'm also trained to operate the tills and sell tickets/souvenirs at Pickering, does this not make more sense as you have a plan B if anything happens to the person normally in charge of selling tickets at Pickering? All it needs is maybe a day or two per year as a refresher and you can have backups to most roles.
Why would you not want to do this?
You seem to have a perception that what would/would not appeal to you, is the same as what would/would not appeal to everyone else.

 

Thanks.

Tom Rolt may possibly be one of the greatest social entrepreneurs that we’ve ever seen, and yes that model is under threat from within. The exterior threats and the necessary responses have brought us to a point where structures are creaking in many different ways. Where I see too little effort being placed is on the relationships within, most especially the informal ones.

I don’t think paid staff are incompatible with the social experiment. What I think is incompatible is not finding ways to ensure that all voices feel heard. And there is a tendency towards this where there is a reliance on paid staff without balancing that with formal and informal structures that provide for a two way exchange of views AND the management not only listens but IS SEEN to listen. It does no harm whatever from time to time to change tack because of feedback.

To echo @35B and respond to your last point, there can be no either or choice between the social experiment and the future of the charity. The charity will not exist without the social experiment. It may take years of decline, but the end will come if the organisation is chosen over the social experiment (and to be fair vice versa).

If it requires 100 staff and 900 volunteers now to run the NYMR and the future is the organisation, then the question has to be how many more paid staff to cover those volunteers. Very generously probably at least another 100? It’s obvious that the ability to cover the costs of such a scenario without some sudden appearance of a consistent additional stream of money in the £millions annually is impossible. It won’t come from the fare box and it will be hard to get from benefactors. There could be a much smaller core railway that might be possible, but I’d be pretty doubtful of that.

I think the existential threat comes from not recognising how critical volunteer longevity is for railways. Many jobs require years of commitment to achieve competence. You cannot build that level of loyalty easily if there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction. Grumbles there have always been, but dissatisfaction is different, tangibly so, and corrosive. And the issue is that morale of current volunteers massively impacts the ability to retain new ones. In a world where there are so many reasons not to volunteer it has never been more important for the volunteers to feel positive about the organisation. Informed, understanding the direction, empowered by being listened to and as a result aligned with the organisation. Such feelings have a noticeable impact on recruiting and retention of new volunteers.

 

Volunteers and paid staff are equally necessary on most heritage railways, with paid staff comprising full time, part time and seasonal. I see the role of the seasonal paid staff of filling critical roles unfilled by volunteers on a particular day. Eg volunteers state in advance the days they wish to volunteer then the roster clerk will subsequently have to use a paid member of staff to fill any gaps left if deemed critical eg is the alternative to not using paid staff to otherwise close a booking office that day with the potential loss of income?

The pure difference between a volunteer and paid member of staff is that a volunteer chooses when to work whilst paid staff are told when to. I happily work alongside paid staff (3 days a week) in that knowledge, and would happily volunteer more but it then it becomes an uncomfortable cost for myself (food and petrol etc).

With the NYMR stepping down to 5 day week hopefully there will be less volunteer gaps needing to be filled with paid seasonal staff, so hopefully there will be more than a pro rata cost saving in operational costs whilst maintaining income. Hopefully the gift aid switch from a 12 month pass to a 10% donation model associated with 15% voucher will maintain, and indeed improve, gift aiding at 2024 level whilst encouraging on-site secondary spend. In addition, such a switch should make the trains more comfortable to travel in as I thought some trains last year were becoming uncomfortably full given the level of returnees on some trains.

So, here is hoping for a successful 2025!

 

I hope this is correct. My concern is that this only addresses seasonal roles, and doesn't talk to the fixed level of roles required to open at all.

 

I'd like to respond to item 3. on your list - increase trading income. Many on here will be aware that the NYMR were extremely fortunate some time ago to acquire the former Mulberries Teashop adjacent to the railway and with an outside area adjacent to the head shunt. Many of us got excited at the prospect of a micro-pub type opportunity and some, including myself, became actively involved in trying to further the concept, sadly to no avail. Only the NYMR would feel the best use of the opportunity was as offices. All sorts of reasons were advanced as to why a micro-pub would not be viable for the benefit of volunteers, staff, visitors and townspeople all year round and as a distinctly different offer within the town. After all, the independent Grosmont Crossing club has proved to be a successful venture. The NYMR has now added a former pub, the Station Hotel, to its property portfolio, but it sits empty and according to rumour, possibly awaiting conversion into offices when volunteer accommodation is urgently required. I would venture to suggest that volunteer effort and enthusiasm could be harnessed to bring both these fantastic trading opportunities into beneficial use seeing as they sit within the heart of a major tourist town.

 

I recall my surprise at discovering that, having fundraised for Mulberries, and visited a busy and thriving tea room, it was closed down.

Reflecting, I’m reminded of the references to Pournelles Law upthread…

 

Suggestions and enthusiastic ideas such as those for Mulberries must be taken seriously but that doesn't mean that they have to be adopted. They should be evaluated and tested to see if the assumptions behind them stand up to scrutiny. The premise appears to be that both Mulberries and the Station Hotel would be surefire profitable businesses. Whatever formula was tried with Mulberries as cafe/tea room it lost money hand over fist. Trading conditions in the town changed significantly with the opening of Costa. Alternative use as a mico pub is an interesting proposition but would require planning consent for change of use .......not a foregone conclusion! Part of the reason for its purchase was to secure the site which is a key boundary of the station. Had it gone to third party ownership future development opportunities for Pickering station would have been constrained.
In case anyone hadn't noticed pubs are closing at an alrming rate because many are not economically viable. The Station Hotel had a long history of hanging on by its financial fingernails. As a pub business it could be more of a liability than an asset. However as a strategic site opposite the station it's another one where purchase by a third party would have cut off future opportunities. Its purchase was funded by a generous donation but any use of a rather dilapidated building involves substantial capital investment. It's long been the ambition to create decent volunteer accommodation. Ownership of the building keeps that opportunity alive.

 

A speedy response and with micropub use for Mulberries felt to be 'interesting', can I suggest the novel idea of an interest group being formed to investigate the idea?

 

"Tom Rolt may possibly be one of the greatest social entrepreneurs that we’ve ever seen, "

Billy Butlin yes but not Tom Rolt. Have you read his autobiography?

 

As Jim is probably aware I undertand that the much missed Nick Stringer was reportedly looking at whether Mulberries could be acquired by the LNERCA and re purposed including providing accommodation for LNERCA volunteers. Sadly that initiative has fallen by the wayside. Rather than let the building site unused the available floors been turned into badly needed office accommodation but that doesn't have to be permanent. Any change will need to be part of an overall plan including the current Park Street offices and the Station Hotel. The Trust Board has already tasked a group, including members with property management expertise, to come up with an overall costed plan.

 

Indeed Nick and I were discussing a number of novel ideas, both for developing the ground floor of Mulberries as micropub, together with other options for volunteer accommodation at other sites within the town. Why not expand the group tasked with looking at property options to include enthusiastic others?

 

Which response really doges neatly away from the issue first raised: that of generating extra income and profit. I think I'm correct in thinking that the Pickering teamroom is profitable, but it is cramped and inadequate, and when a train arrives and people see the queues they walk by and on to one of the cafes in the town centre. That's a lot of potential revenue lost. For all the talk from Park Street of premium dining, it is therefore surprising that he opportunity was never taken to pitch Mulberries as an upmarket tearoom a la "Bettys", the furnishings and decor wouldn't be very different but the menu and service should be - and the office could remain upstairs! The point about pubs closing is a valid one, but Pickering still seems to be quite a vibrant watering hole and a pub that stands out a little from the others would be a popular addition, I feel - but I'd site the actual microbrewery at Grosmont, as part of a craft centre development there!

Any costed plans for these facilities needs to consider alternative possible uses, as well. For example, the Station Hotel could partially be used as an onshore catering base for the Pullman diner to provide extra flexibility if the train is to be based at Pickering in the future. As for volunteer accommodation, older volunteers will remember that in the early days of having acquired Park Street the management built volunteer accommodation into it, but what they provided was almost universally loathed by all the volunteers, who refused to use it (there was one who did, but he was odd at the best of times!) and remained in the - by then decrepit - LMS sleeper. The moral of that is that it would be as well to consult with the potential users of the facility, because I very much doubt if any of those with "property management expertise" will be among them - and , as I have outlined, it really needs to involve people with retail and catering nous.!