West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Thank you, Steve.

 

From what's been said on here before, applicability of the policies seems to hinge on the position of the HR policies with the WSR's SMS, and with wording in the policies that specifies that they apply to volunteers. That is over and above the legal position, which is that volunteers do not benefit from employment rights.

 

Thanks for that - I try to keep out of the legal world, far too many big words for me!

 

There are different ways to conduct petitions, and the method chosen by @Maverick and companions provides for both traceability and anonymity. In the context of this particular row, and the allegations regarding the treatment of volunteers, that doesn't seem unreasonable to me. And I write as someone who is uneasy about wholly anonymous posters - even though I post under a username, my real name is easily identifiable from information openly available on here. As @242A1 has always posted completely anonymously, I take him in good faith in a way that I might not a new poster with no details visible.

Like others, I suggest that you pause to reflect on why volunteers feel the need to run a petition like this, why they feel the need for anonymity, and why so many have signed it. That suggests far more than just malcontents agitating, but that something is genuinely and deeply wrong with the organisation - it would have to be for such a petition to get so much support. As a non-local, non-volunteer, I shall not be signing - despite the open invitation from the petition organisers, I fear the reaction on receipt will be to try to undermine the legitimacy of the petition by nit picking at who the signatories are rather than looking at the substance of the petition.

So, please, will you use your influence to help persuade the plc Board to take the simple measures that would allow them to rebuild trust in the plc as a fit custodian of the Minehead branch; trust that it has seriously eroded by it's own actions over the last few months.

 

Covered upthread: profit and cash are different things, and the business outlook changed hugely from the end of the financial year in March.

As @Jamessquared has said the messages are mixed but the PLC has said:

I'd go as far as to say the PLC is saying it is being prudent to keep cash in the business to ensure future operations by seeking to rearrange payment of its debts. IMO that's not necessarily the same as "desperately needs cash to keep it solvent".

I only know the published cash position at March (about £440k including this unpaid debt), subsequent appeal totals (£100k+, depending how you count it) and target (£500k to 2021). You could model cashflow based on those numbers but without knowing WSR PLC's outgoings (other railways have said they're burning through £25-£75k a month) or cashflow projections (potential redundancies? repayment of creditors?), one would be speculating how much cash they will have or need.

Patrick

 

How much did the Notice to Quit to the S&DRT cost?

 

All fair, but I am struggling with accounts that claim to have improved it's profitability by £1.1m (probably in reality rather less (about £800k?) given the different length financial years) on turnover of £3.3m, yet is so tight for cash that it seemingly can't pay a debt and is signalling affordability problems with honouring other contracts. They may be accurate and compliant with all applicable standards, but they still feel wrong to me. I'd struggle with it in a contracting business where revenue recognition is an issue, but in a business where the income line will basically mirror the farebox, it feels like the right process is getting to the wrong ultimate answer.

 

And if not in escrow, then at least catered for in a provision in the accounts. Which, if it isn't, suggests that the headline "profit" is overstated by £100k as the accounts will not have been prepared on a suitably prudential basis.

 

Without sight of those accounts, I agree - but the "£300k profit" can of worms is already wide open.

 

Could you set out all the facts then?


There's 2 main issues that have arisen this year already;
The S&DRT Notice to Quit, & the associated lies/mistruths around it
The non-payment to the WSRA for the shop & cafe


What i've seen posted, which you seek to dismiss as 'under informed opinion', is facts.

The Notice to Quit was issued out of the blue
The ORR did not have any issues with the S&DRT

There was an agreement/contract between the WSRA & the plc to sell the shop, cafe etc
The plc has not kept their side of the contract, to the extent that the WSRA have had no choice but to report it to the CC

What if it's that very structure that is the problem?
What if the very people that are currently on the various boards are the problem?



-----

I'll also point out, that because some of the organisations involved are registered charities, there is a public interest in ensuring that they operate correctly.


Also, if the WSR as a whole collapses in some 'scandalous' manner, then it has the potential to impact the rest of the heritage railway sector.

 

My typo, sorry. But your observation is accurate. Offending post edited now. Thanks.

 

appointed

That's one of the issues/problems though isn't it...

People, & it's often the same people over & over again, get 'appointed', & therefore haven't faced any scrutiny.



Also, the individual concerned isn't just a random individual.
They are currently, & have been for 2 years, a Board Member & Trustee of the WSSRT.

When they have previously been on the WSRA Board, they were not on the plc Board at the same time.

 

Even if the plc is trying to kill you off???

I don't know if the S&DRT own any shares in the plc, but there is likely to be some of their membership that do. Removing them from the site effectively makes them armchair shareholders who won't be active.

Dragging the WSRA & WSSRT into the Notice to Quit mess with easily disproved lies has harmed those organisations reputations.

Failing to honour the sales contract with the WSRA harms them financially.
That has also created a situation where I doubt the WSRA can issue any grants to the plc (will that be the next issue raised by the plc?)

 

A very telling quote from the Plc. In reality, the cash might be leaving the Plc, but it is not leaving the railway. Indeed, it would be coming back to the Plc in one form or another in pretty short order, but as far as the Plc is concerned, "le chemin de fer, c'est moi". All other organisations are outsiders, hangers on and, ultimately, superfluous and dispensable.

 

Seems to me the plc are trying to play the WSRA & WSSRT off against one another. just an observation.