That’s the thing….. the public and political attraction to contracted and P3 relationships is the premise that you can hold someone to a contract - and, if they don’t perform, they don’t get paid or suffer penalties. Or you can just “fire” them and find someone else. That is far too simplistic a belief and it fundamentally doesn’t happen.
I don’t know how much information ML has access to about Alstom’s pool of train crews. I suspect the contract simply says Alstom will provide people with credentials, subject to some sort of audit process to verify that the workers have the required credentials and training. So if ML became dissatisfied with Alstom and terminated the relationship, it would have to find all those people and transition their employment to themselves or another contractor. In the interim, they would have no access to those workers, and all service would be affected.
ML Negotiator: “Item 27. We need a clause that sets a standard and lays out penalties for a situation where the contractor can’t provide all the crews we require.”
Alsom Negotiator: “ No need. That will never happen. Look, this relationship won’t ever work if you keep being so negative about everything that might hypothetically happen….”
ML Negotiator: “Oh, OK. Sorry. Item 28…….”
- Paul
