Track maintenance operation outside the UK

[Keyvan-SH]

Hello everyone.
Hope you all are doing well.
I couldn't find the answer of a question in my available resources. I appreciate it if you share your knowledge on this case.
Here is the question:
What have been the pros and cons and challenges of outsourcing track maintenance operations to private companies in your country?
Is the maintenance and repair of railway Tracks of your country carried out by private companies? or by the governmental railway company itself? or in cooperation with each other? if so, how does that cooperation is being done?
thanks

 

[edwin_m]

When the state railway in the UK was privatised in the 1990s, the parts that did track maintenance were sold off as separate companies and had contracts to continue maintaining the tracks on behalf of the owner (Railtrack).

However, the contracts were badly drawn up and the maintenance companies found there were very few rules on what they actually had to do for the money. As they were private companies, there could do less work and cut costs to make more profit.

Railtrack was also a private company and the management thought they didn't need to worry about the maintenance because they were paying someone to do that. In 2000 there was a serious accident (the Hatfield derailment) because a cracked rail had not been replaced and smashed into small pieces. Neither the maintainer nor Railtrack had done anything about it, and many speed restrictions were then applied because nobody could be sure there were no other rails in a similar state. Ultimately Railtrack returned to public ownership as Network Rail, and took routine maintenance back in house.

This isn't to say contracting out of maintenance is automatically a bad idea, but contracts need to be very clearly defined and the client organisation needs to have the knowledge and resources to monitor their contracts and understand the state of the track itself.

 

[Mugby]

The amount of day-to-day maintenance has been reduced considerably in recent years because Network Rail don't want staff on the track in the daytime whilst trains are running. Virtually all of the track renewals and heavy maintenance is done by private contractors and the lines being worked on are completely closed, often for several days and sometimes weeks. The work is overseen by Network Rail's own engineers.
The downside of this is that contractors can name their own, very high prices and Network Rail has to pay because the work must be done.

Having had over 30 years service on the permanent way here, it seems to me that Network Rail have adopted a policy of 'Let's renew everything, then it won't need any maintenance', the debt they have accumulated because of this policy has become astronomical. It's not a good policy but our railways in Britain are now run by people who don't know any other way of doing things.

 

[Keyvan-SH]

When the state railway in the UK was privatised in the 1990s, the parts that did track maintenance were sold off as separate companies and had contracts to continue maintaining the tracks on behalf of the owner (Railtrack).

However, the contracts were badly drawn up and the maintenance companies found there were very few rules on what they actually had to do for the money. As they were private companies, there could do less work and cut costs to make more profit.

Railtrack was also a private company and the management thought they didn't need to worry about the maintenance because they were paying someone to do that. In 2000 there was a serious accident (the Hatfield derailment) because a cracked rail had not been replaced and smashed into small pieces. Neither the maintainer nor Railtrack had done anything about it, and many speed restrictions were then applied because nobody could be sure there were no other rails in a similar state. Ultimately Railtrack returned to public ownership as Network Rail, and took routine maintenance back in house.

This isn't to say contracting out of maintenance is automatically a bad idea, but contracts need to be very clearly defined and the client organisation needs to have the knowledge and resources to monitor their contracts and understand the state of the track itself.

Thanks a lot. your message contains very useful information and also your opinions are very very valuable. thanks.

The amount of day-to-day maintenance has been reduced considerably in recent years because Network Rail don't want staff on the track in the daytime whilst trains are running. Virtually all of the track renewals and heavy maintenance is done by private contractors and the lines being worked on are completely closed, often for several days and sometimes weeks. The work is overseen by Network Rail's own engineers.
The downside of this is that contractors can name their own, very high prices and Network Rail has to pay because the work must be done.

Having had over 30 years service on the permanent way here, it seems to me that Network Rail have adopted a policy of 'Let's renew everything, then it won't need any maintenance', the debt they have accumulated because of this policy has become astronomical. It's not a good policy but our railways in Britain are now run by people who don't know any other way of doing things.

I'm so proud for sharing your experiences with me. It's very precious. thank you very much.

I would be grateful if share the same information about other countries.

 

[Viper]

As a very general overview, day to day maintenance is typically carried out by internal teams at Network Rail, however works such as renewals or large projects are contracted to private companies, with internal Network Rail teams overseeing the works from a project management point of view.

 

[Gloster]

An indirect result of the way that maintenance is now handled is an almost complete lack of consideration for the effect disruption and even lengthy closures for engineering works have on passengers and goods traffic: the negative effect of forcing people on to replacement buses, longer journey times, cancellations and other inconveniences doesn’t seem to be factored into Network Rail and the maintenance companies’ calculations. The operating companies get compensation for their costs and can pay some of this out to the customer, although it may be difficult for the passenger to claim. The operating companies are on limited term contracts, so they are not interested in causing trouble with Network Rail as long-term damage to the confidence of the customer base does not affect them after their contract expires.

(Railwayman in the 1980s with the nationalised British Rail and a very strong critic of just about all forms of privatisation, but particularly the rail one.)

 

[AlexNL]

In the Netherlands, ProRail does not have its own 'orange army' like Network Rail does.

The country has been divided into 21 lots, and all maintenance and renewal activities for those lots are contracted out and performed by private companies. These companies work based on output driven maintenance (PGO, prestatie gericht onderhoud) contracts, the contractors aren't told what to do but instead are told what is expected they deliver. This system generally seems to function well.

PGO contracts run for 5 years and are then re-tendered.

 

[Taunton]

In the USA the mainstream (private) railroads have long had their own track crews, but were supplemented by contractors, and smaller railroads progressively moved over to mainly using these, especially lines transferred to various public commuter operations. The largest contractor was once Morrison-Knudsen, also one of the largest US civil engineering contractors, who later moved into rolling stock as well, losing enough money there to bring the entire company down. Nowadays Herzog ( https://www.herzog.com/ ) is probably the largest contractor. There is no equivalent of TUPE in the USA, so at termination of a contract experienced employees either move elsewhere in the country or are looking for a job themselves. There are still, on the most mainstream routes, substantial realignments and straightenings being carried out, often in timescales which would amaze those from the UK, achieving in months what would take years here.

Compared to the UK there are also far more derailments around, which track crews from either the railroad or contractors respond to with surprising alacrity, with some notably specialised plant readily to hand.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

The Morrison-Knudsen factory in Hornell, New York is now owned by Alstom. The new Acela trains (Avelia Liberty) are being built there.