Narrow Boat Trust - where are you?

[Guest]

I was a dedicate railway enthusiast....<SNIP>

 

All well and good but not sure of the point you're making...

[Roger t' Bodger]

Of course if a volunteer really messes up and as a result somebody dies there will be consequences for them personally and the organisation they volunteer for.

 

I was referring to less serious issues up to the point of somebody dying or being injured as a result of a persons actions/inactions.

 

An employer can invoke sanctions up to dismissal to manage an employees conduct, I don't believe a volunteer organisation can do the same....

 

 

I think that if someone really caused an accident on the cut either as due to being an incompetent boater or volunteer, the trauma would make them think again about going near a boat in the future unless they were a totally irresponsible arsehole and in the NBT that would be picked up immediately and they would be told to either change, train or seek their joliies elsewhere. And you know the cut, the word would quickly get around. The NBT doesn't select members for their appitude or socialbility but they don't last long if they don't fit in.

 

I know NBT members who by no fault of their own have got into difficulties with no injuries to anyone and have mentally beaten themselves up by themselves for years hence thus slowing their learned confidence and abilities.

 

Thats life without lines to guide....

 

 

 

All well and good but not sure of the point you're making...

 

 

I'm not quite sure myself

[Guest]

I'm not quite sure myself

 

Clearly...

 

I'll try again....

 

If I work for an employer and I mess up, the ultimate sanction they can enforce is taking away my livelihood......

 

If I do the same for an organisation I volunteer for.............

[Roger t' Bodger]

I'm a bit out of salts today, due to another lousy night, so clear joined up thinking about anything is hard. Sorry about 'choo choos' but I only throw that at people who think these things are the 'bees knees' to the exclusion of all else....

 

So time for another video, in fact the second one I ever made with 'proper' editing. I was trying to capture the essence of the experience with the recorded soundtrack but there was so many distracting noises; human, wind and otherwise that the band I saw shortly before, were drafted in (and credited) to supply it instead.

 

Goodnight from the cellar- Oh god! the dogs farted again!

 

http://www.vimeo.com/10950303

Edited July 24, 2010 by Roger t' Bodger

[Roger t' Bodger]

Clearly...

 

I'll try again....

 

If I work for an employer and I mess up, the ultimate sanction they can enforce is taking away my livelihood......

 

If I do the same for an organisation I volunteer for.............

 

Sorry we are out of sync.

 

It hasn't happen yet thank God and I can't think of where that has happen in my experience but I would have thought that an official inquiry would create a situation where if the person proved to be clearly to blame then it would be an issue of who was in charge and responsible for the overall situation to whether it was a organisational failing or the the person who caused the incident was to blame through a apparent lack of training or individual reckless behaviourthat logically ingores that training and guidelines. There's nowt as strange as folk - including the legal profession....

 

I must escape the dog

Night

[Chertsey]

Apparently it's very hard to sack a volunteer - I mean, literally, hard to get rid of them. And what do you do if they keep turning up, complaining they've been unfairly treated, claiming the whole organisation is run by a clique who have just got it in for them.... Whereas the ones who *are* good at it soon get fed up with the incompetence of the others, and of being called elitist and cliquey... and leave... Or they're so good, and so dedicated, that they end up doing everything, and end up burning themselves out... and leave.

 

Voluntary organisations generally have a high turnover and are reliant on constantly bringing in new volunteers, so will tend to have a high proportion of inexperienced people. The idea that entire service industries can be run using volunteer labour is cloud cuckoo land. It can work for something like NBT where the volunteers are all in it for what they personally get out of it, but once you get into a situation where people are expected to work just for the warm glow of providing a service.... However they make it work, it sure as hell ain't going to be voluntary.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Chertsey

[Derek R.]

How much of the Kennet & Avon, and the Basingstoke were restored to navigable condition through volunteer working groups? They must have had their 'moments', but the end result is there.

 

Derek

[gaggle]

Different group of canal boat bods asking for voluteers stating NO EXPERIENCE NEEDED , the horse boat people ,sue ect.

I knew they were inexperienced when i watched them .

[Chertsey]

How much of the Kennet & Avon, and the Basingstoke were restored to navigable condition through volunteer working groups? They must have had their 'moments', but the end result is there.

 

Derek

Absolutely - an end result is a great motivating factor, and clearly there are some people who have devoted 30, 40 years to such projects. Plus a lot, lot more who have come in full of enthusiasm, become disillusioned or worn out, and left, all within a few years. On projects like that there are lots of jobs for unskilled and inexperienced people; less so when operating a boat or a pair of boats. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, good or bad; just that's the way it is when you're reliant on volunteers. Maybe people should cut the NBT a bit of slack on that basis - or maybe you could say if they can't do it to professional standards then they shouldn't do it at all. But that rule would force an awful lot of people off the waterways.

 

Different group of canal boat bods asking for voluteers stating NO EXPERIENCE NEEDED , the horse boat people ,sue ect.

I knew they were inexperienced when i watched them .

Certainly that is how CCNA recruit, we really try to 'sell' it to potential volunteers. That is probably both the cause, and the effect, of having a high turnover.

[Guest]

How much of the Kennet & Avon, and the Basingstoke were restored to navigable condition through volunteer working groups? They must have had their 'moments', but the end result is there.

 

Derek

 

Indeed - volunteers rule....why doesn't everybody just work for nowt...

 

Of course no tax would be paid, no NII, no council tax......

[Derek R.]

My favourite! http://www.vimeo.com/10950303

 

I go back to it time and time again especially like 'Alah Lake' & 'Sunday Smile'.

 

Many thanks - Derek

[RLWP]

I'm a bit out of salts today, due to another lousy night, so clear joined up thinking about anything is hard. Sorry about 'choo choos' but I only throw that at people who think these things are the 'bees knees' to the exclusion of all else....

 

So time for another video, in fact the second one I ever made with 'proper' editing. I was trying to capture the essence of the experience with the recorded soundtrack but there was so many distracting noises; human, wind and otherwise that the band I saw shortly before, were drafted in (and credited) to supply it instead.

 

Goodnight from the cellar- Oh god! the dogs farted again!

 

http://www.vimeo.com/10950303

 

Hi Roger. Perhaps if there is a window in the cellar you could open it to let the smell out.

 

Richard

 

It was the dog wasn't it...

[Graham Davis]

I'm a bit out of salts today, due to another lousy night, so clear joined up thinking about anything is hard. Sorry about 'choo choos' but I only throw that at people who think these things are the 'bees knees' to the exclusion of all else....

 

I'll forgive you this time then!!

Still pulling levers and "knocking out" in a proper signalbox with LOWER quadrant signal!!

[Guest]

It was the dog wasn't it...

 

Sorry Richard I let one slip...

 

[RLWP]

I refuse to believe Dennis could ever do a thing like that.

 

 

Richard

Edited July 24, 2010 by RLWP

[pete harrison]

Different group of canal boat bods asking for voluteers stating NO EXPERIENCE NEEDED , the horse boat people ,sue ect.

I knew they were inexperienced when i watched them .

 

There are clearly two ways of looking at this, and as an example I shall use my employer as I do not currently volunteer for anything.

 

My employer recently needed to take on a new member of staff to work alongside me in a large chemical works. After numerous interviews somebody was taken on who has over 25 years experience in this field and a very impressive C.V.. As the past few months have gone by it has become very clear that this person does not live up to either his experience or C.V..

 

At the time of recruitment I suggested taking on somebody from outside of our industry so that they could be trained to do things the way we think acceptable, have no preconceptions of what is really involved and not question / compare all of our proceedures.

 

In my opinion it is most important to have a structure for training, that it is not open to interpretation and is followed by everybody - all of the time. Of course it also helps if the trainers are capable of teaching the trainees, understand the core values of the business and set the highest of standards. From past experience I am prone to think that volunteer narrow boat organisations do not set high enough standards for their steerers / crew and members are judged to be competant all too often as a matter of convenience when the boats need to be moved. When I trained steerers for the N.B.T. Ltd. I endeavoured to be thorough and make the candidate feel that they were achieving something of value. I do not believe for one moment that a R.Y.A. certificate and first aid qualification, both acheivable in a couple of days, have any value to the individual whatsoever, especially when related to 'historic' narrow boats.

 

Out of interest how does the N.B.T. Ltd. train their steerers and crew nowadays ?

Edited July 24, 2010 by pete harrison

[sociable_hermit]

I'm a bit out of salts today, due to another lousy night, so clear joined up thinking about anything is hard. Sorry about 'choo choos' but I only throw that at people who think these things are the 'bees knees' to the exclusion of all else....

http://www.vimeo.com/10950303

You're easily offended today, aren't you? I wasn't suggesting in any way that railway volunteers are better than canal volunteers, or anything like that. Just trying to explain what motivates people to join organisations like that, in answer to Chertsey's post.

 

What I am pointing out is that without pay, job satisfaction is king. And to get a real sense of job satisfaction it helps to be doing something challenging. Easy stuff isn't very rewarding, and soon becomes boring too. That's the same for both railway and canal groups, and I wasn't trying to draw any distinction between the two. Presumably that's one of the reasons for the NBT running loaded deep-draught boats for long hours each day - because it's more challenging, and therefore more fun? And yes, there are those on the railways who take it too far, and expect perfection from everyone all of the time - the 'rivet-counters' you refer to - and no, I don't like them either. Funnily enough the real rivet-counters often tend to be the armchair experts rather than those doing the work...

 

There are many similarities between working on steam locomotives and handling boats. Both forms of machinery are tactile, best handled by 'feel'. Every trip is different, and there are always many things going on at once (more on a loco than on a boat, in fact, despite there being no steering to worry about). You cannot learn how to handle either a steam loco or a boat out of a book, and you get some people who pick the necessary skills up quickly and some who will never learn, no matter how hard they try. Both forms of transport require teamwork. Both reward effort hansomely, but punish the unwary. Need I go on?

 

In answer to the even-more-off-topic debate about responsibility, volunteers take on just as much responsibility as their paid equivalents would do. Again, proving one's ability to handle responsibility is part of the job satisfaction cycle - if you're not responsible for anything, you don't care whether it goes well or not. Give people responsibility, where it is due, and they generally live up to it. And if there is a problem, they can be demoted or asked to leave. For minor misdemeanours they might also be temporarily banned.

 

The point a few people seem to be missing here is that people really WANT to work for the organisations they support. The more responsibility and job satisfaction people have, the more they want to stay. Most of the volunteers who drop out and leave do so within the first 6 months, i.e. before they are involved enough to really care that much either way.

[Derek R.]

"What I am pointing out is that without pay, job satisfaction is king. And to get a real sense of job satisfaction it helps to be doing something challenging. Easy stuff isn't very rewarding, and soon becomes boring too. "

 

I hope you don't mind me taking just the one line, but in it I see something of an irony.

Removing the cash reward element, job satisfaction is reliant on a number of things.

1 Do you feel a contribution has been made

2 Do you need recognition of your contribution - or not

3 Are you seeking to impress

4 are you there for the crack

 

Now the latter two will doubtless be recognised as dubious, but at times a jester is a benefit, at others a hinderance. Anyone seeking to impress, generally doesn't, and if not asked to leave will often do so of their own accord if their 'impression' is not recognised as they wish. This leaves us with the first two.

 

A valid contribution may be in doing a simple task, like cleaning the bog, washing up, picking up litter. Simple tasks that I for one excel at (no, I'm not coming on your boat to clean your bog - unless you pay), and my satisfaction is looking behind and seeing a clean path or pile of dishes. I need no-ones recognition or approval to have fulfilled a desire from within - to improve something, to make good.

More complicated tasks working as a member of a team are equally satisfying, especially so when things are achieved - building stuff, testing things, getting them to function as required. These also are satisfying. But lets suppose you have been given a task - teamwork or otherwise and there is no achievement, there is failure - perhaps repeatedly. Something is wrong. Either technique, or direction. In such an instance, recognition of the effort involved, and the need for a new solution is vital for any kind of satisfaction to be achieved.

 

If a simple job becomes boring, then one of two elements are present; someone has given you the 'wrong' job - beneath the inherent skills; or you are not getting any recognition. Both elements contain a degree of superiority in the worker. If satisfaction is only achieved through challenge, then take up sport. But then some problems require ingenuity of thought, that too is challenging and if successful in execution very satisfying indeed "Well done Jim, I would never have though of that!" etc. "Now, can you run off and clean the bog, there's a good chap". Well, it takes all sorts. Good volunteers need to be flexible.

 

Lots of people get paid to do their jobs, and are far from satisfied. They are working for the pay - mostly - a cog in the factory of cogs. My wife 'loves' her work (with animals), but if she won the lottery she'd be off like a shot - but would go back on a voluntary basis because she genuinely loves the work, but does not wish to feel compulsion to do so. Volunteers are worth their weight in gold, it's getting the right treatment as well as training that keeps them happy and productive. Recognition - babies cry for it - soldiers die for it. The element from within is equally important, and sometimes severely overlooked. Seeing yourself as a valuable asset is just as rewarding - that's a good job done!

 

Derek

[Chertsey]

What SH says is the ideal, but dare I say it, a little starry eyed. For one thing, different people have different levels of skills and capabilities, and their own assessment of these might not coincide with others'. It is true that doing things for the satisfaction of doing them is what motivates people to volunteer, but that feeling of satisfaction tends to have diminishing returns. Cleaning a toilet the 100th time is not as satisfying as doing it the first time. Add to that the fact that volunteers often come to be taken for granted, and that exacerbates the process, leading to resentment as well as diminished satisfaction. Then there are the personality clashes. And, a big factor, the frustration of operating within an organisation that is run by a committee, so any little job takes months to be approved, let alone carried out.

 

A voluntary organisation is not analogous to an employment situation, for this and a range of other reasons. In employment, people are being compensated for giving up their time. In volunteering the activity must provide the reward in itself. This means that it must provide a far higher level of reward. If it does, then people will perform well as SH notes, but it is very difficult to sustain that high level of reward. In employment people are usually dependent on the employer (they don't want to lose their jobs and wages) so they are willing to be told what to do, how to do a job, what training to undertake and so on. In voluntary organisations the boot is on the other foot: the organisation is dependent on the volunteer. So they will go out of their way not to alienate them, no matter how pig headed or incompetent they are. And the organisation has no sanction to make them improve. Ultimately, they can tell them to go away, but then they have lost another volunteer.

 

In short, running a voluntary organisation is very hard work, but working for one isn't always non stop rewards either. There's a lot of responsibility without power, and a lot of frustration, on both sides. The idea that it's the panacea for all society's woes is frighetning.

[Roger t' Bodger]

What SH says is the ideal, but dare I say it, a little starry eyed. For one thing, different people have different levels of skills and capabilities, and their own assessment of these might not coincide with others'. It is true that doing things for the satisfaction of doing them is what motivates people to volunteer, but that feeling of satisfaction tends to have diminishing returns. Cleaning a toilet the 100th time is not as satisfying as doing it the first time. Add to that the fact that volunteers often come to be taken for granted, and that exacerbates the process, leading to resentment as well as diminished satisfaction. Then there are the personality clashes. And, a big factor, the frustration of operating within an organisation that is run by a committee, so any little job takes months to be approved, let alone carried out.

 

A voluntary organisation is not analogous to an employment situation, for this and a range of other reasons. In employment, people are being compensated for giving up their time. In volunteering the activity must provide the reward in itself. This means that it must provide a far higher level of reward. If it does, then people will perform well as SH notes, but it is very difficult to sustain that high level of reward. In employment people are usually dependent on the employer (they don't want to lose their jobs and wages) so they are willing to be told what to do, how to do a job, what training to undertake and so on. In voluntary organisations the boot is on the other foot: the organisation is dependent on the volunteer. So they will go out of their way not to alienate them, no matter how pig headed or incompetent they are. And the organisation has no sanction to make them improve. Ultimately, they can tell them to go away, but then they have lost another volunteer.

 

In short, running a voluntary organisation is very hard work, but working for one isn't always non stop rewards either. There's a lot of responsibility without power, and a lot of frustration, on both sides. The idea that it's the panacea for all society's woes is frighetning.

 

 

Well said, I've worked mostly in the voluntary sector all my life and I can't disagree with a word of that - especially the last sentence.

[RLWP]

Well said, I've worked mostly in the voluntary sector all my life and I can't disagree with a word of that - especially the last sentence.

 

How's the dog's digestion this morning?

 

Richard

[Natalie Graham]

Different group of canal boat bods asking for voluteers stating NO EXPERIENCE NEEDED , the horse boat people ,sue ect.

I knew they were inexperienced when i watched them .

 

Strange that, given there must be whole armies of people with years of horse boating experience queuing up to volunteer there services.

 

If there are organisations which are willing to offer the opportunity for people to gain experience and learn the skills involved in horse boating, operating old working boats or any other activity, why do people choose to criticise these organiastions when their volunteers show evidence of their inexperience and expect them to have all the skills of someone who has been doing it for a lifetime?

[Chertsey]

Strange that, given there must be whole armies of people with years of horse boating experience queuing up to volunteer there services.

 

If there are organisations which are willing to offer the opportunity for people to gain experience and learn the skills involved in horse boating, operating old working boats or any other activity, why do people choose to criticise these organiastions when their volunteers show evidence of their inexperience and expect them to have all the skills of someone who has been doing it for a lifetime?

I for one am not criticising people's lack of skill and experience, merely recognising and attempting to explain it. Some organisations are clearly better than others at recruiting, training and retaining volunteers but all face the same challenges.

[Derek R.]

Idealists with Rose tinted glasses?

 

Most of those who spent their lifetimes doing the 'job' have departed. How many ex-working boat people are alive and living afloat - ever wonderd why they aren't? Better opportunities arose when the cut life was in jeopardy. Maintenance and a BW cottage, or Council house/flat and factory and driving jobs took them away. Those left have the memories, and show up now and then, but old bones don't dig and delve like they used to. We can only rely on some ghost written memoirs in the main. Some have yet to be told in full and written and soon it ill be too late. There are a few exceptions, but so often it is the enthusiast/volunteer who is left to pick up the puzzle and work it out painfully with whispered voices, hearsay, and criticism.

 

Derek

[Natalie Graham]

I for one am not criticising people's lack of skill and experience, merely recognising and attempting to explain it. Some organisations are clearly better than others at recruiting, training and retaining volunteers but all face the same challenges.

I never thought you were, nor did I mean to imply it. Sorry if it came across otherwise. I agree with your comments on volunteers. Rather I was commenting on those posts we get from time to time on this thread and others which go along the lines of "I saw this group of volunteers from organisation X and they weren't behaving like experienced boat people at all. They are a bad reflection on the organisation." rather than applauding the organisation for given the inexperienced people to opportunity to learn.

 

When was the last time we read a post on here saying, "I encountered a group of people from The Narrowboat Trust [to take a topical example] who had no idea what they were doing. Well done to the NBT for giving them the opportunity of learning how to do it. I am sure they will soon get the hang of things and I hope they have fun doing so."?