In view of recent "behavioral problems" by a certain public official in a city in New York, and a possibly ham-handed, name-calling counterpoint by a seemingly otherwise very honorable and hardworking railroad staff, I thought it might be worthwhile to revisit this thread, especially since these two columns turned up on my Facebook page:

http://ivn.us/ars-politica/2013/04/25/t ... ersuasive/

http://ivn.us/ars-politica/2013/04/27/61/

Granted, these approaches may not always work (there is always the possibility you'll have to "negotiate" with a fragile, inflated ego), but they generally should be what you use before you start calling someone "poopy-pants" or some other, perhaps stronger terms.

To me, this has been the most interesting thread I've followed because all the issues brought up are a legitimate concern. I've run into many of the roadblocks that stem from the "good ol' boys club" dynamic. I will continue to follow this thread with keen interest.

These could be for a new thread, but I think they also fit here.

Both come from the flipper-floople business in Ulster County and in the Adirondacks, but they also suggest something else. . .

Maybe, just maybe, we have a higher purpose in what we do. . .and we need to remember that. . .

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blo ... D7U0.email

http://www.dailyfreeman.com/articles/20 ... =fullstory

I know of a case where someone was denied membership in an NRHS chapter because he wasn't a member, told another group he was, and tried to negotiate a business deal with them on behalf of the chapter when he clearly wasn't authorized to do so. Even worse, the deal would have benefited him.

There was another case where a member was expelled for a fraud case where in effect he tried to have the chapter pay for bills on his behalf. The amount of money involved was significant enough that case wound up in court and he had to pay the chapter back.

Bob H

Need some advice…

By accident, I discovered that one of the people using the yahoo Railway-Signal interest group is a convicted sex offender. This guy seemingly came out of the blue. He is focused on restoring a large R-2 style railroad signal – something that could be of interest to young boys. The guy is also portly and has grown a white beard and matching white hair in the likeness of another familiar person also of interest to young children. He is manipulative and shows no remorse.

Originally, I intended to sell detailed signaling info to the guy, but the tenor, frequency, demeanor of his emails prompted a check of public records. I subsequently learned that the guy did hard time for sexually abusing numerous young children, among other things. The money order he sent was returned along with a copy of his public record.

The whole affair gives me the creeps – so authorities were advised. What, if anything, can be done to advise fellow members in an appropriate manner?

Thanks.

Jim K

Your approach sounds pretty appropriate given the extra information, but keep in mind that taking a whizz in the weeds is enough to get someone on "the list".

There are lots of stories of folks having their lives ruined by that, so I think it's equally important to make sure not to always have a knee-jerk reaction to a discovery of someone on the sex offenders list.

Ed,

I hear you...

But I heard the kids more.

Offense #1 indecent liberty with a minor age 12, convicted 1-7-92;
Offense #2 indecent liberty with a minor age 6, convicted 4-20-92;
Offense #3 indecent liberty with a minor age 9, convicted 4-20-92;
Offense #4 indecent liberty with a minor age 9, convicted 4-29-92:
Offense #5 indecent liberty with a minor age 12, convicted 1-7-92

Tough one.

You could send a private message to the owner of the group with a copy of the record (assuming it is public record in your jurisdiction) or telling him where to access it. You could ask (not tell) the list owner whether it is appropriate for this guy to be on a public list which could have young members.

I'm not sure whether Yahoo could limit the guy's access based on his record.

Beyond that, it's hard to do much and stay within legal limits... torches and pitch forks are tempting, but the authorities frown on that sort of stuff.

Steve Hunter

Oh, I wouldn't call that one a tough one... that's a nice clear case. Thats why I didn't want to take issue with it, just put it out there for others. I definitely think you did the right thing there.

I have a friend who's gotten himself on the list for an indiscretion of youth (that is nowhere near that realm), and the things he's had to deal with as a result really do border on "cruel and unusual". This is mostly due to the horrible way the laws are written, but nobody ever wants to do anything to address it because then they'd immediately be painted as being "soft on child predators".

Just looking the data over, I see five cases that occurred in a relatively short period over 20 years ago and nothing since.

There's a missing piece of the puzzle here -- why aren't there more ? Has the guy been in prison?

Bob H

Possibly. But are we going to discount the possibility that he "learned his lesson" and now behaves?

I vividly remember an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer shortly after "Megan's Law", the law requiring neighbors to be notified when a convicted child sex offender moved into an area, was passed. One of the very first people affected was a guy that had molested his daughter fifteen or twenty years ago, as a very young girl. His only perversion was incestuous sex, and he had no designs whatsoever on other children. He had been through prison and therapy, and had been even rebuilding a minimal relationship with said daughter. But he couldn't get a job in his trained field anymore with his record; in fact, he could barely get any job. He finally found a liveable place he could afford. And then the law required the form letter notification of all his neighbors, without the background story. He finally had to move out and go into hiding after death threats. He himself went to the newspaper to tell his story, saying "These are the unintended consequences of this well-intended law: I, who am not a threat to any other children, am homeless because of this law."

Not everything is black-and-white, or cut-and-dried.

For anyone interested, there was a good article on this a few years back in The Economist too: http://www.economist.com/node/14165460

Dealing with situations among members in a society is always a balancing act or a ballerina walking on tiptoes. Your management team must be able to "see" people for who they are and what they can contribute. That includes those who have had a precarious background and those that have other avenues. Management must also address that background with the individual in question to assure that they have taken due diligence in securing the safety of other members, passengers, and guests, as well as, the organization as a whole.

Members who have a "sexual predator" label or habit find their way into groups. Don't just look at the one on the preferred list, but also those guys and girls that are out there to score one and hit upon members that have no interest or desire.

Addressing the first label is easier. You know who to talk too and what about if you've done your homework. But beware, passing that "homework" around can cause you legal trouble too, so watch out. Sit down with the proposed or already member and address it. What areas do you want to work in? What would you do if surrounded by children and they want a hug? How do you react when children or young men or women are in the area? Why are you bringing these boys and girls around here without parental supervision? What can our organization do to help you be a good member and keep ourselves safe and you safe from accusations or problems? Tell the member who will know about the label, and that is kept within administrative circles not the whole society, and that they will be watching for any misbehavior in regards to it. Then make sure as management that you keep an eye on this and inform new management members, if appropriate, and take action immediately if something is brought to your attention.

Make sure your training programs have a portion dealing with children, mentally or physically challenged individuals -- what to do, how to handle, where appropriate touching is allowed, what to do when parent is not present. These things can help you better your organization.

The second issue is a problem too. Most individuals are loners looking for a social outlet and they join groups of a common interest in order to find others. These sexual predators might be harder to distinguish but can cause just as much friction or more among a group. Marital breakups, homosexual connections, multiple sexual partners and gossip and stories beyond the water cooler. Management needs to be aware of these types of activities and work to keep them from causing friction, hard feelings, or social isolation as well as disrupting events or causing a public stir.

But let's go further in the issue of loners, because they too can cause problems within a society that needs its members to work together as a team. Many times these members would rather not work with others, but have time to criticize or complain about what management or the board or other members have done, do, or don't do. They won't help on projects that would benefit the whole, but come up with lists of their own projects and want management to sanction it as okay work to be done to their own timeframe. In this fashion, management has no means to assess what or how it has been done because the lone worker keeps it to themselves. They may have skills, but don't really want to share them because they are too critical about how others do it or how they come together to discuss other avenues to getting something done, contrary to the loner's point of view.

Most management skills involve allowing others to express ideas, concepts, methods of doing something and then making a decision as to how to best get it done or leaving it to the group to do it. If it's something that might be done again, then having discussions after the project could benefit in changing it to be more efficient in the future. But this isn't possible with the lone worker since they don't want anyone to know how it was done, just that they did it and it's done, it works, and that's it.

Tell me how some of you have dealt with this scenario.

Do not forget, while many of the scenarios you have outlined definitely have merit, society/culture views are changing daily.

It isn't anyone's business what is going on in a couples marriage, nor will organizations be able to continue to blacklist people that are homosexual. If you begin to judge men and women in your organization based on their number of sexual partners...many organizations will judge some of their skilled volunteer/paid labor right out the door. The alpha/country/jock/religious/beer drinking/cussing/woman chasing individual is a staple of many groups, railroad or otherwise. We can not direct someone's home life at a museum. Organizations could find themselves facing problems all over. US citizens love a good lawsuit...best to avoid those. That being said, inappropriate behavior or touching by anyone to anyone else is always wrong.

Preservation groups, while mostly private, must remember they need the public to exist and operate. The public isn't my grandfather's public anymore. You simply can't categorize everyone who participates. You only need to look at today's news to see how religion, sex, race, marriage, guns, and politics can bring down people.

Maybe we should all be in agreement to address items that need to be addressed, but be mindful that what works say in one area of the country, doesn't pass in another part of the country. Be mindful that all walks of human life pass thru our stations wanting to enjoy the experience and live their lives.

According to a friend who is active at the Puffing Billy Railway in Victoria, Australia, every volunteer or staff member who will be [i]within sight[/i] of children at any time is required by law to pass a background check.