Transit for the Public, Not for Profit
At a recent hearing held by the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, private transit companies, led by the coalition group North American Transit Alliance (NATA), proclaimed the solution to all of America’s transit problems: make it easier to privatize service and harder to hold contractors accountable.
NATA represents the six largest contractors that dominate the industry: Transdev, Keolis, MV Transportation, WeDriveU, Beacon Mobility, and RATP Dev, whose CEO, Matt Booterbaugh, testified on behalf of the group. ATU members recognize these companies from the bargaining table, where they try to drive down our wages, benefits, and working conditions. We know that private contractors rarely deliver the services they promise and often cut corners to send profits back to their corporate headquarters in France, Germany, and the U.K. – all at the expense of frontline workers, local taxpayers, and the passengers they supposedly serve.
In his testimony, Booterbaugh urged Congress, the Department of Transportation, and the Federal Transit Administration to make changes that would alter planning, grant, and procurement processes, and make it easier for companies to secure contracts and harder for them to be held accountable. His proposals included:
- Requiring agencies to conduct annual assessments to identify opportunities to contract out services;
- Favoring agencies that contract out services when awarding discretionary federal grants; and,
- Limiting liquidated damages to one percent of the total contract value and ensuring that they are not “punitive.”
These changes would wreak havoc on transit agencies attempting to increase post-pandemic ridership and provide reliable service by upending their service models and limiting their ability to hold contractors accountable. Discretionary grants should be awarded based solely on the merit of a given project rather than the prospect of enriching private contractors. And we know from many of our properties that liquidated damages, as currently implemented, are often an inadequate deterrent to stop private contractors from providing poor service. Restricting their use would only benefit bad actors in the industry. Simply put, NATA’s proposals are all about boosting its members’ bottom lines, not providing quality transit service and sustaining good jobs for transit workers.
We know all too well that contracted services cause more problems in the long term and lead to worse service for riders who depend on transit. Many members have experienced the chaos of contractor changeovers and concessionary demands from these companies during negotiations. And despite what these companies would like people to believe, the trend in recent years has been for agencies to bring work back in-house to improve service delivery and worker retention. This is true across the country, from Sacramento to Tulsa to Cincinnati to New Orleans. The ATU will continue to fight against the privatization of transit services and to ensure that private contractors are held accountable for the quality of service they deliver.