If we're going to start to debate the worth of services, why to we pay grown men who play games for a living and contribute nothing more than manipulating inflated animals organs towards arbitrarily defined goals, drive around in circles faster than other people going nowhere, or hit inanimate objects traveling through the air with sticks millions while paramedics, police, teachers, nurses, firefighters and others who do provide services of high value make so little in comparison? Remuneration has never been based on real value provided.

Because that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread or the topic of this board?

Your post is a classic example of using Distraction as a fancy way of saying "sit down and shut up" when you don't like when something is being discussed.

I don't know if "ideally" really works here, especially since organizations in this industry are rarely ever working under ideal circumstances. Mileage can and will vary and a one-size-fits-all approach is impractical. Not every organization has "capable" volunteers that can individually or collectively check all the boxes (mechanical, ops, events, development, admin, etc). Shouldn't an organization with hundreds of operating days a year, millions in assets, and millions in the bank have a level of professional, accountable oversight and strategy? Shouldn't someone always be minding the store? Not every place is lucky like IRM to have a "force of nature" and generationally established leadership.

I think disqualifying organizations that have paid staff over volunteers is also an unfortunate take and completely overlooks how most non-railroad NPO's operate, especially those that are very very busy, and very successful. If there is a "trust problem" because a railroad organization has payroll, is it because of the belief that the revenue should just go back into the bucket to restore and operate the equipment?

How many non-profit groups in our towns own, operate, program, and host events in our theatres, churches, economic development orgs, downtown alliances, tourism bureaus, farmers' markets, educational programs, etc. Whether it's a single paid position, a contract job...there is often someone in the midst being both compensated but also likewise being held accountable.

The same doubts levied against operations with paid staff and a volunteer base can be cast against organizations that are all-volunteer. In a paid position, the foundation for the position is that someone is professional, experienced, well-versed, and accountable for the operations of an organization. They can be recruited, hired, and dismissed based on performance.

Speaking anecdotally, a "mesh" of paid and volunteer seem to comprise the largest piece of the pie (I would be surprised if there is not already a survey or tally of this in HeritageRail's files.) East Broad Top comes immediately to mind where there are major capital expenditures being made, an effective and highly energetic volunteer presence, and a few full-time paid positions to keep things moving.

I would be just as suspect of an all-volunteer group with a large pool of money and no professional oversight (be it a board of unqualified folks, lack of audit history, etc).

Sifting through 990s and performing that kind of diligence is good and proper, but thinking it offers the entire story is bad form, especially as it gives no insight to board decisions or strategy, let alone the regional job market or compensation levels for people in executive or professional positions outside of train-world. I can't think of any metro Zoos or aquariums or Children's Museums that are 100% volunteer, either.

Kelly, Thanks for your thoughtful response! Always enjoy reading your thoughts on here.

"I think disqualifying organizations that have paid staff over volunteers is also an unfortunate take and completely overlooks how most non-railroad NPO's operate, especially those that are very very busy, and very successful. If there is a "trust problem" because a railroad organization has payroll, is it because of the belief that the revenue should just go back into the bucket to restore and operate the equipment?". - I wasn't suggesting that a non-profit organization doesn't have any paid staff. Even IRM has the occasional paid employee! Sorry if I made it sound otherwise. Yes IDEALLY everyone is a volunteer but as you said, we don't live or operate in an ideal world with ideal conditions. I'm saying that I think the LEADERSHIP should be volunteers. I believe your position at Fort Wayne is volunteer correct?

Sifting through 990s and performing that kind of diligence is good and proper, but thinking it offers the entire story is bad form, especially as it gives no insight to board decisions or strategy, let alone the regional job market or compensation levels for people in executive or professional positions outside of train-world. . - it certainly doesn't offer the entire story. But it does invite someone to compare where the money is going to in an organization. Why do the B&O and Sacramento need to pay $250k a year for the same position that gets $0 at IRM and TVRM?

Much as I may agree with the idea you are trying to promote, the reality is that the free market has soundly determined that people are willing to pay BIG money to watch these spectacles, either directly in person or indirectly via advertising dollars on television or the like, and even let political leaders take their dollars to underwrite such enterprises. Indeed, in many cases, people pay obscene amounts merely for the privilege to buy seats, then further for the tickets to attend themselves, or even luxury suites, parking, obscene markups on concessions, etc.

I have seen accounting studies that have suggested that, on average (mostly ignoring the headline-grabbing salaries of the top players), the average professional baseball, football, or basketball player is UNDERpaid as an "entertainer," relative to the actual massive revenue involved with their enterprise. Thus the pro baseball strikes of recent history, etc.

If the rail preservation enterprise is not viewed as worthy of the investment of cubic dollars in the same way as cities underwrite stadiums/arenas, then we should be asking ourselves what they do right and we do wrong in marketing, not casting aspersions on our competition.

Sadly, while professional athletes are not curing cancer and seemingly can’t stand for the national anthem that makes them millionaires, the market supports it and allows it.

In terms of non-profit leaders being overpaid, the concept is the same. If you’re bringing in the spectators, you’re worth a quarter million in someone’s eyes.

Lastly, and in line with the thread’s topic, yes, non profits have a trust problem. The money stolen from various organizations makes me skeptical of who I donate to. Moreover, railfan run organizations without professional paid staff probably won’t get my money.

Thanks and sorry that I may have taken your point further than you intended. And you're correct, Fort Wayne has no paid employees, but has had the occasional contractor for various specialized projects. I also know that if I didn't have such a unique set of employment circumstances over the last few years, my ability to commit 30+ hours a week to Fort Wayne would be severely challenged.

As far as leadership goes, oversight, leadership, and guidance should always exist in a board, and there are countless unpaid board positions in our industry, but having an Executive Director or CEO can be the method by which the board puts things into action, or by which a talented volunteer group can get some real horsepower behind them.

I think there are also countless examples of museums and tourist railroads that have their very own "forces of nature" at the helm who are unpaid Presidents or CEOs, but who are also leaders by way of their historical affiliation with the org. For as much as any one person can contribute and muscle progress, losing a key volunteer can be incredibly disruptive. What happens when your unpaid, 70-year-old mainstay of a leader dies? They could afford to do it for free, or next to free, but not everyone can.

Broadly speaking organizations like IRM have key personnel who do an awful lot, and groups like this are more or less subsidized (in a non-financial way) by those one or two key people who manage everything on an unpaid basis. Not only can people like that be irreplaceable, but the lack of a succession plan or talent pool means that there have to be incentives beyond the mission/vision to bring the right talent in, which brings me to...



I can't speak to the specifics of either of the aforementioned, but I know of several railroad organizations that maintain a board with one or two paid positions, and that organization controls an operating entity where some of those same folks and others are on a separate payroll. What may look like $30k in annual compensation is actually plus 100k from the subsidiary.

Ignoring the job market and trends specific to regions and professions, the $243k salary for the B&O museum is around just 5% of the annual gross. If I tell you that you spend 5% of your on something, would you consider that 5% to be frivolous?

I also know of two prominent railroad tourist org that are actively recruiting right now, including one that has not had great luck in retention, and one that hasn't had a new person in the leadership role for over several decades. They are all re-evaluating and challenged to adapt to an ever-evolving job market at the same time. When you consider that many of the folks they're reaching out to have established careers, families, homes, and the job would require relocation, housing, etc...and then you hope that they have some degree of acumen or exposure to railroading...

I can tell you some of the folks they've spoken to ask the opposite question, "Why would I work for you for any less?"

Sure, the trains have to run on time, but you can't eat a boxcar or pay a bill with one.