West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Peter, I appreciate your concerns, however also as another interested observer may I be blunt please ? (acceptable in Yorkshire so many of my friends from that estimable part of the world tell me).

Mr Davidge in the last decade, to my knowledge, has fulfilled many roles on the Railway: ie station master at Bishops Lydeard and later Stogumber, project manager at Minehead, WSRA Trustee and later FoWSR Chairman. AFAIK he resigned from all these roles. He has now I assume resigned as a Plc director.

During the last year Messrs Courtney, Grellier, Hancock and Nicholson have joined the Plc Board. They are all well known on the Railway as working volunteers . They IMHO bring relevant experience to their roles with the appropriate combination of enthusiasm, professionalism, outside experience plus the ability to communicate and be part of a team. We are fortunate I suggest.

Michael Rowe

 

Let's not forget Michael that Ken was front and centre in the efforts to remove the troublesome 6+1. Furthermore, in the past couple of years we have seen major progress on H&S under Ken's stewardship including some new processes which have been shared across the UK. One piece of work in particular has anticipated and prevented at least one very serious incident which would have had major implications for the continued operation of preserved lines in the UK.

I am sure you were just about to add this to your post.

kind regards

Brian

 

Are you keen to acquire a criminal record for theft and/or assault if they resist?

 

Exactly so. Indeed Ken has conributed a large amount of time, effort, and money to the WSR since the beginning of preservation. His efforts have had a consideranble positive effect on the WSR PLC and a number of associated organisations. There are many perfectly good reasons for people resigning from posts but MR implies that there is some negative pattern about the fact that Ken has not remained in some posts for longer periods. I am aware that Mike and Ken don't see eye to eye. That is unfortunate since both of them have a considerable depth of knowledge and expertise that the WSR can well use.

 

Nothing wrong with bluntness Michael. Probably Ken will make his own comments when he considers them appropriate. In the meantime I refer you to post #7684. Sadly the information I have gathered, in confidence, from various sources suggests that the picture is not as rosy as you suggest. I look forward to the Stakeholders Meeting on Saturday week when more answers may be forthcoming. I shall say no more until then.

 

Can I caution against a regime where 'everything in the hands of the Chairman'. ALL members, but especially volunteers, should feel part of 'their' railway and that they can make a contribution. Good leadership is vital to 'oil the wheels' of things happening (and ensure that there is an overall, co-ordinated approach rather than 'silos' of independent activity, although in some areas, such as Station Groups working within an overall framework, this can still be a real asset), but it must not become a situation where for anything to happen, an individual figure must agree, and if they don't, it won't happen (while at the same time ensuring all relevant persons are consulted and their views taken into account, especially where they hold relevant responsibilities - and this cuts both ways, with those with areas of responsibility needing to be able to be relied upon to work out how things can be done - there may be times when somebody raises a 'show stopper' but if they only ever raise objections, then, no matter how right they may be on an individual issue, they risk being ignored!).

Many years ago, another line had a big tidy-up of the lineside because one of the more active Directors suggested it was needed and offered to oversee organising it. Many departments came together - even the catering department supplied a kitchen car for cooking lunches (which I seem to recall the then Chairman actually cooked!) and the exercise was repeated to achieve a step change in the appearance of the lineside which the immediately responsible department would have struggled to achieve alongside their more pressing work programme without resources being brought in from other departments as happened.

A good volunteer organisation needs an overall plan, which everyone can 'own' and all having the sense they can have input and their voice be heard. Good leadership is essential, but must not be relied upon to 'do' everything - if nothing else, that is an unfair workload on the leadership in question, no matter how good they are at the job!

Steven

 

Dear Michael, thank you for outlining my work record with the WSR. However you need a few extra bits. 1971 to 1972 member of the steering committee forming the WSR. 1972 to 1974/5 Membership Secretary of the new WSRA, assistant to Harry Lee collecting artifacts for the WSR (mainly signalling equipment) (Robin will confirm that I appear in the WSRA minutes No 1 and onwards). I was never Station Master at Stogumber, that was my wife, she is the one with bumps. You forget that I was the assistant to the GM for a while whilst I was the Station Master at BL. You also forget that I managed to upgrade the IT equipment at MD and installed NAS storage and common files across the network, I also installed line connectors to give the Ops people hi-speed connectivity (by the way the IT, assist to the GM and BL SM were all coincidental). Having resigned my position as BL SM I was asked to take over the Special Projects Officer's role and managed the Volunteer Accommodation at MD (including planning and building regulations, site mains electric and sewerage upgrades and the FoMS workshop and WN workshop planning and Building regulations). I should add that I retired from the railway at the end of that through ill health (unstable diabetes). However I continued as the responsible person for funerals on the Railway (and I helped form FoWSR and selected you as a member of the committee at the same time). I found that my diabetes again played up and retired for health reasons) from FoWSR until I was invited to apply for a directorship and was offered and accepted the Safety Audit Directorship. I must add that I have never worked so hard for the PLC than as a director sometimes working 6 days a week. However the Railway needs to evolve and the Safety Audit role was to be merged with another portfolio and a Director of Safety was required. I was offered the post and after due consideration I declined the position. I had agreed with the past Chairman that I would undertake 3 years and 2 of them are complete. I did not think it would be appropriate to accept this very important role with just 1 more year of my tenure to complete as that would be too disruptive to the PLC. I have resigned as a Director but have assure the Chairman and Vice Chairman that I will assist and advise the new role if I am required. Regards Ken

 

On that subject, is there any progress on the issue of recompense? Or any timescale for when progress is expected? N.B. I am just wondering whether anything is happening or expected to happen, not enquiring about what may be happening.

 

Coming a bit late to the discussion about portacabins, let's not forget their essence; that they are (presumably?) fairly quick and easy to install and equally quick and easy to remove when there is an opportunity to replace them by something better. So they are surely preferable to a non-ideal permanent structure (some of which we have heard about on this and other threads).

 

https://www.wsra.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/AGM-Minutes-170930-1.pdf

Steve

 

Agreed.

But with over a dozen in use and no prospect of any of them being replaced by something better, I believe epidemic proportions have been reached.

Robin

 

Well said. I certainly wouldn't advocate "everything in the hands of the Chairman" but as you say good leadership is vital.

 

Agreed. Think "Chairman of the Board" rather than "Chairman of the railway".

Regards

Matt

 

There is no Chairman of the Railway.

 

Deciding where the boundary between bluntness and rudeness lies can always be a tricky exercise.

I am not able to be at the WSR stakeholders meeting on Saturday week - my diary fills up more than 10 days ahead generally and I will be on long pre-arranged heritage railway business elsewhere in the country then.

But this would have been my question, had I been there:

The present board seems strong on general business experience, but very light indeed on time-served big railway experience. Very unusual, if you look around the heritage railway world, generally, and something which gives me cause for concern. In addition, to have lost our safety professional from the Board is not helpful.

A minor (!) rail industry company called Railtrack went down a similar path some years ago, and I, frankly, see the same difficulties evident in recent events, where, in the WSR's High Councils, the relevant experience in a specialist, technical, highly regulated business does not appear to be present.

I would have liked to ask the WSR plc Chairman if he perceived the same lacuna.

Perhaps someone could ask the question for me?

Robin

 

Sorry I wasn't referring specifically to the WSR in this regard.

 

West Somerset Railway - Then and now #98

Bishops Lydeard 1907 / 2017

A view northwards through the station.

I have expanded the frame of the 'Now' shot to the right to show how the shop and catering store have absorbed the 1906 waiting shelter.

1907

2017

 

I do love the gas lamps in the now picture , I suppose a step up from oil laps ?

 

One source may be through the North Eastern Railway Association and their photo collection at Darlington.
https://sites.google.com/site/northeasternrailwayassociation/
Contact page and Archivist.

 

I was wondering why Mr Maunsell decided to be blunt (or rude) in the first place. What did he set out to achieve ?