Ryde Lifeguards

Ryde and Sandown Beach Lifeguards open applications for 2025 summer season

Ryde & Sandown Beach Lifeguards have opened applications for the 2025 summer season. 

Becoming a Lifeguard with RBLG puts you on the frontline of coastal safety services on the Isle of Wight.

RBLG (Registered Charity 1174631) is looking for some new Beach Lifeguards to join their 2025 team. The service is delivered in Ryde and Sandown during the summer months on behalf of Ryde and Sandown Town Councils, as well as supporting the safety cover of local events. 

A variety of employment opportunities
RBLG provides a variety of employment opportunities for prospective Lifeguards including seasonal roles, which provide regular work (days and times) with part-time or full-time hours over a set period of time, and casual roles. 

The service also has voluntary roles available as Beach Safety, to act as a support role for the Beach Lifeguards. 

Are you considering applying to become a Beach Lifeguard?

  • Are you willing to take on the responsibility of keeping hundreds of beachgoers safe?
  • Are you reliable and can follow procedures to ensure the best possible service is delivered to the Island community?
  • Do you have the courage to prevent incidents before they happen and physically rescue anyone who does get into trouble?
  • Do you want to work as part of a collaborative team where everyone’s contributions count?
  • Can you swim 400m in less than 8 minutes? 

If you answered YES to the statements above, then we’d love to hear from you!

Get in touch
Please email us for an application pack – rydebeachlifeguards@gmail.com

This pack contains all the information required to apply, including details of necessary qualifications and the selection process.


News shared by Todd on behalf of Ryde and Sandown Beach Lifeguards. Ed

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
0 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
henry
21, January 2021 4:26 pm

Hahaha, can’t you tell an election is coming ;-)

Colin
21, January 2021 4:36 pm

Much as I would like to see the railways put back to how they were before the Beeching axe in the sixties, I am realistic enough to know that it will never happen. Why? because it is economically unviable for starters. And for seconds, the rail route has been built on in various places. Electioneering again from the tories who couldn’t run a Dotto train let alone… Read more »

peter1
21, January 2021 5:14 pm

Why wouldn’t the steam railway co-operate? Extended rail services right through to Ryde Pierhead.
But I thought the closed track was sold off to make it almost impossible to reinstate. Here’s a thought; extend to Cowes, at least Mill Hill Station!

Tim
Reply to  peter1
21, January 2021 5:55 pm

To avoid tourists getting electrocuted by the third rail and avoid having to upgrade their signaling and rolling stock to national network standards!

wellsm
Reply to  Tim
21, January 2021 11:55 pm

The Class 483 trains can be built to use batteries, the third rail does not have to be a barrier.

Tim
Reply to  wellsm
22, January 2021 8:38 am

Even without the third rail the upgrades required would finish off the steam railway operations.

neilpalmer400
Reply to  wellsm
22, January 2021 11:11 pm

That’s a key point. The section from Smallbrook Jn to Wootton could easily be covered by 483’s with a battery pack (and if really necessary could be run non-stop Smallbrook to Wootton at 25mph due to light rail regulations). Most of the right of way from Wootton to the edge of Newport seems to be mostly clear (a section of new track/route at the end to maybe… Read more »

Tim
21, January 2021 5:53 pm

Bring back the No.39 bus instead!

railwayphil
21, January 2021 7:49 pm

The IOWSR has a Light Railway Order limiting operations to 25mph. Once this speed is exceeded, full National Safety Standards are required plus massive track and signalling investment ro satisfy these Standards. There is no capacity for around 175 days a year with heritage services running between say 10am and 6pm. So a regular main line service would either reduce the steam services to an unviable level… Read more »

wellsm
Reply to  railwayphil
21, January 2021 11:54 pm

Where there is a will there is often a way and one would think that extending back to Newport would relieve a great deal of traffic on the road between there and Ryde. I have been a member of IOWSR for many years and I would look forward to a sharing arrangement if a way can be found. Too often people rush in to say this and… Read more »

wellsm
Reply to  wellsm
21, January 2021 11:58 pm

Also, there is no reason why trains could not continue to run under an LRO if that made the project feasible economically. There is no need for an HST!

Highwayman
21, January 2021 9:01 pm

Being part of the “wealth of knowledge and skill on the Island”, I was phoned by a professional contact employed by a national consultancy that was thinking of bidding to do the feasibility study. After speaking to me, they quickly decided not to. It sounds like a nice idea, but it’s completely unrealistic, for all the reasons already put forward. I can’t understand why IWC should spend… Read more »

wellsm
Reply to  Highwayman
22, January 2021 12:00 am

What a shame that you would go so far as to put a potential contractor off, the benefits of getting traffic off the roads would be substantial.

Highwayman
Reply to  wellsm
23, January 2021 12:32 am

That’s not entirely fair – I certainly don’t dispute the benefits of getting traffic off the roads. If I thought there was any realistic possibility of this study achieving it, I would have agreed to help (which is what my contact had phoned me to ask) and picked up some useful fees from doing so. It would be lovely to see the lines reinsated, but I have… Read more »

Tim
Reply to  Highwayman
22, January 2021 8:40 am

Its the transport board trying to deflect discussions away from taboo subjects!

Snowwolf1
Reply to  Highwayman
22, January 2021 11:37 am

Obviously to justify the hike in Council tax they tend to impose or try to impose this year. All this means is more money being wasted on “Consultations” at a massive price and nothing to show at the end or they will end up supplying something that doesn’t work – like the floating bridge!

planespeaker
22, January 2021 8:14 am

When the combined might of the MP and Council is unable to provide a reliable way of crossing the River Medina between East and West Cowes, how on God’s earth do they think they can restore even the tiniest part of the Islands railway system?

walkingwizard
22, January 2021 9:17 am

The extension of the railway will remove cycle tracks that the council had been trying to get us to use. Use the consultants cash to improve the poor standard of the existing cycle paths.

hialtitude
Reply to  walkingwizard
22, January 2021 11:17 am

Yep, the section of cycle track between Wootton and Island Harbour is only suitable for those with mountain bikes and life jackets.

Generally the cycle paths on the Island suck big time.

Snowwolf1
22, January 2021 11:34 am

Too little too late to a certain extent. The cost alone would be astronomical due to infrastructure such as bridges being removed, tracks built over – they should never have ended the rail network on the Island this in itself would have been our greatest attraction for tourists the film industry, documentaries and keeping skills going even more so it they trains remained steam.

aeroscale
22, January 2021 9:59 pm

Losing access to the permanent way was arguably the most short-sighted decision ever on the Island, making this undoubtedly the biggest and most costly project here in living memory – but it simply needs to be done. Future generations will thank those who provide an alternative to ever-increasing road usage and, even in the short term, there will be a huge boost to local economy in the… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined