Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I would think that, as long as a fare was charged, that would be sufficient. The railway is at liberty to charge what it wants. However, I only think, I don’t know.
It does raise an interesting question regarding volunteers, who get 12 free tickets/year to give out as a thank you.

 

Perhaps the last would be ok provided that you don’t have to be a member in order to volunteer? (I don’t know if that’s the case here or not)

 

On the railway I was referring to ( guess which?) you don’t have to be a member to volunteer.

 

Certainly that's the case on the WSR. It is not a closed shop, anyone can volunteer. I think thats the case on most lines.

 

...which, of course, has given rise in the past on occasions to the question as to why should anyone bother to pay to be a WSRA member if you can voulunteer for the Plc free ?

 

Volunteering is never free for the volunteer, the question is why should there be an artificial charge made?

 

I’m no expert but I think you’ll find that is not the case. Your insurance will cover volunteers and not members. They are two different categories of person. The railway may require you to be a member to volunteer but to say for insurance purposes it is a red herring.

 

You should not be forced to join the WSRA or the WSRHT. You join because of the excellent benefits such as the award-winning journal and the travel perks. And knowing you are supporting the railway via a charity.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with that statement and feel volunteers should be members of the supporting organisation. Both the railways I am associated with decided that volunteers need not be members as that could be considered as a barrier to volunteering. That was met with significant objections by the existing volunteers. One has rescinded the idea and the second has revised their approach to the subject whilst still allowing it.

 

I know of people who have been volunteers for 30 years and would probably stop if forced to join a
Society they have no common ground with.

 

You do have to wonder if something's gone wrong if a volunteer of 30 years feels they have nothing in common with a society with the nominal purpose of supporting said railway...

 

In the pages of this forum there are plenty of examples of the ways in which support organisations can and do lose the support of their members. It is perhaps a good thing if the safety valve of not having to be part of the support organisation is available. A form of quiet quitting?

I should add than none of the examples I was thinking of are people who work on the L and B, although I am aware of quite quitting of a different kind even at Woody Bay. I’d be slightly surprised if there aren’t a few volunteers at every railway who don’t give their best as a result of one form of poor engagement from the railway or another.

 

It is one of the biggest issues in the voluntary world, and maintaining the right culture is very hard. If you have people in positions who have never had the opportunity to learn about how voluntary culture works and how to get the best out of people, then you will always have people walking away from the various projects.

While some may think it is crazy, I feel that the working culture at a heritage railway is just as important as raising funds.

 

I feel with Stuart at Woody Bay you have perhaps the best working culture you can have, both employed and volunteer.

The problems with gaining and holding volunteers is right across the volunteer sector and has been now for many years and due to a number of factors.

The chief factors are, retirement age has risen, people's retirement habits have changed, the pandemic saw many reassess what they do in their free time and/or found alternative interests when many places were closed, cheaper holidays abroad and taking more holidays in any year, the advent of the internet and the shift from doing things and getting involved to experiencing things.

All these contribute to what we see now in that far less consider doing volunteer work and so those who have been involved in the past are not being replaced at the same rate as before.

We have also seen an expansion in the need for volunteer work, heritage, museums, child care, social care, wildlife organisations, and so on.

Less volunteers to go round more organisations.

 

Interesting point, but I'd look to the WSR (I'm thinking specifically during the X6 days) and argue the opposite, and say it can be quite dangerous. Disillusioned members, rather that work to remove the rot and make the effort to vote, just quit. But that organisation has still got issues, that just get worse until it affects the railway to such an extent that it doesn't matter whether you're a member or not, it's affecting you simply by virtue of being involved on the railway.

Sent from my PGT-N19 using Tapatalk

 

Surely that’s less about specific organisations, and more about the wider “family”* culture.

* - the word “family” cropped up a lot in WSR discussions, and was apt. The emotions involved went well beyond normal society membership.

 

That highlights the question of what a “member” is and the purpose of membership. Traditionally the assumption was that people became members to help sustain a railway’s finances. In terms of willingness to support appeals, leave legacies etc. that’s often the result but less so as far as subscriptions are concerned. Indeed the cost of administering membership, producing and posting a magazine etc can consume a high proportion of that income stream. If generous travel concessions or other inducements are offered the railway can end up with a negative return from membership.
Membership also tends to be conflated with shareholding. Unlike shareholders members of a charity, even one that owns the railway, typically have no ownership stake in it. Support charities often have limited charitable purposes which means their ability to support the owner/operator of the railway is constrained. People become members of the Charity to support its objectives which may be much narrower than general support of the railway the Charity is associated with. Sometimes the entity to which members belong has no or a very limited stake in the owning/operating entity meaning that the members and volunteers may have no direct involvement in the organisation they volunteer to support and that manages that involvement. The situation varies from one railway to the next and is often the result of corporate structures that have grown without an overall design. Perhaps a better concept is to think of “Supporters” which encompasses all those with an interest in the success of the railway. That includes members of the various entities involved, their shareholders, wider stakeholders and funders as well as those supporting the railway by visiting it and spending money…..in other words a railway family.