North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Playing devils advocate, if the guy already had commitments it would be unreasonable to say that he couldn't continue with them. On the other hand, if it was simply a question of spending the winter months at his villa, that's a different matter. We don't know the full story.

 

I think that was one of the previous suggestions. Could be worth following up.

 

If he had two months worth of work booked elsewhere, at what is usually the busiest time of year for civil engineering works on the NYMR , I think I would question why they employed him in the first place, maybe a week or two to fulfill old obligations, but two months at a critical time hardly shows commitment to the job he was applying for, imho. I'm pretty sure that if I had ever applied for a job in my field and asked to be released for a couple of months to work "from home" abroad (if that's what it is) the discussion of the interview panel would have swiftly moved on to the next candidate! And, if it was such a struggle to find a suitable candidate, could they not have postponed the appointment and used a reputable firm of consulting engineers?

 

It would have been probably like that during most of my career but the modern world is not like that now.
We do not know when he was "employed" or "contracted" but a 6 months notice period is not unusual on employment contracts, and I can think of at least one case where we enforced it on someone to the hour, so this may have been either a pre existing arrangement or an agreement to get someone earlier.

 

A bit of an update - a rumour has reached me - source an unofficial message from "someone in the know" - that there may be a new problem, with potentially problematical scour of the riverbank on the trackside where the river runs close to the railway between Goathland and Pickering, at a location where there hasn't previously been a problem. This could be yet another expensive problem for the railway.

It has been suggested to me that, with all these financial issues mounting up, there is a covert plan (possibly masterminded by a previous Trust official) to send the Trust into receiverhip, with a wealthy investor lined up to purchase the railway from the Trust and turn it into a private organisation. I'd like to believe that isn't the case, and if it were to happen I think there would be an enormous outcry, and deep anger at HLF, Yorkshire Forward and other organisations that have supported the Trust in the past. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that the Trust has wasted a lot of its reserves in recent years propping up the Plc's finances, so it perhaps isn't so far fetched as it might be.

 

NYMR Leadership should remember that nature abhors a vacuum.
And in the absence of real news, people will make stuff up!

 

I don't think that really works; wealthy private individuals can't just buy charitable assets, if a charity winds up they have to be offered to another similar charity by preference first. There's also the LRO or equivilant which, as our learned friend formerly of this parish liked to remind us, is not transferable in that way.


Sent from my PGT-N19 using Tapatalk

 

I have no way of verifying the rumour, and it strikes me as something unlikely as charities can’t become bankrupt in quite that way, BUT if we decode the message a little there are wealthy individuals who have charitable trusts that they established, that if the individuals were to provide the necessary resources, could enable the NYMRT to transfer the responsibility and assets to that charitable trust. It sounds pretty far fetched to me, the rumour has gone round before (about a different place), and there was never any evidence for that rumour.

 

I did say that I'd like to believe this to not the case, more a piece of wild conjecture, and I stand by that but stranger things can sometimes happen - and we're told that the light railway order is vested with the Plc, which removes or adds complications, I'm not sure which!

I am more inclined to believe the rumour about problems with river scour, knowing the source it has appeared via. Does the NYMR have anyone capable of sorting out the permission paperwork from the EA to carry out anti-scour defence work, in what will be just about the remotest and inaccessible location yet tackled on the NYMR.

 

If nothing else does it shows the follow of their communications strategy - they need to be on the front foot, not the back one.

If you have a problem and you don't know all the answers, its better to say that than keep quiet hoping that people won't ask questions - because invariably they will and, in the absence of answers they will believe plausible answers from elsewhere.

Tom

 

Then he shouldn’t have been hired. Those terms do exist, and they’re a pain. But acceptance of such terms raises the governance of the railway into sharper focus - especially if that means that he can’t actually deliver on the core role that the railway needs him to deliver on.

 

No-one has ever accused the NYMR management - in recent times, at least, of being anywhere remotely near being good at communications, and as for openness they really haven't got a clue! How do they expect people to support an organisation that's veiled in institutional secrecy!

 

Here is Phil Sash’s LinkedIn page ……

https://www.linkedin.com/in/phillip...re_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app

Having scrolled through his posts, I get the impression that over the last year or so he has been fishing for work. Most of his posts have attracted zero comments and only one or two ‘likes’.

He also doesn’t seem to be a member, let alone a fellow, of any of the professional institutions that I would expect to see were I looking for Civils / bridge consultant.

Caveat Empor.

 

Yes the scour is very believable

 

I don't know if anyone from the NYMR monitors the forum, but if they do- I can put them in contact with a small company we work with who have done a fair chunk of scour protection, and specialise in difficult access jobs/access through sensitive environments.

Chris

 

I wonder how it would be dealt with, though - stone filled gabions, or sheet steel piles?

 

As they probably aren't even admitting to the problem yet, or even to reading the forum, and the "civil engineer " probably hasn't seen it yet if he's still in Spain, your offer is possibly a bit premature - but if you pm me with the info I will try to pass it on.

 

@Lineisclear was seen on the forum this morning at 8:02am

I’m guessing he’s either been gagged, or is embarrassed at the shambles of how the NYMR are dealing with the bridge issue - he should be!

I would also add that he should be ashamed that he has played a part in creating the railway of today, where members and staff are scared to have an opinion, management seem to be totally incompetent and the members have been disconnected from their railway.

 

The warning signs were there from the start… a highly experienced civil engineer who had so much work on that he had to open offices in Europe and Dubai who was available to start the following week? A man who didn’t turn up on his first day. An engineer who ran a huge resignalling scheme that nobody involved in signalling has ever heard of. Two websites that don’t marry up with dates and roles, a list of multi million pound projects he has completed but isn’t VAT registered. Telling people in the pub that he was headhunted for this job when he is self employed and applied for it…

 

Our learned friend may say the LRO is not transferable in any way. However, the original LRO obtained by the British Railways Board was transferred to the North York Moors Historical Railway Trust Ltd in 1975 using powers conferred under Section 24 of the Light Railways Act 1896. Although parts of the 1896 LRO have been repealed, section 24 has not and I would suggest that a transfer order under Section 24 of the Light Railways Act 1896 should still be possible and, failing that, Section 1 of the Transport & Works Act 1992 will allow and has previously been used for the Transfer of Light Railway Orders. e.g. the The Brecon Mountain Railway (Light Railway) Order 1980 was transferred to the Vale of Rheidol Railway Limited.
It can be done.