On 1: I spoke of maintenance in the context of delays (both tracks in bad shape and track works on long-neglected errors cause delays) and the service that can be offered (also in the contect of branchline closures). The latter doesn't just involve tracks and trains, but stuff like train control and signaling. As for other comparisons: in France or Germany, trains travel longer distances (more chance for delays, and for the transmission of delays as one train waits for another for those changing trains) on a more complex network (the job of coordinating trains at main stations is much more complex), with a more complex (and less taxed) road competition. I didn't wrote about this in the original post, but even comparing the German and French railways (when one focuses on employee number) is not straightforward: the French railways are more focused on passenger transport, which (especially since DB closed most of its small stations for freight) needs more men.

BTW, AFAIK the Netherlands delays problem (which I recall having read of improving recently, would have to look it up to make sure) was a capacity problem - the frequency of trains got too close to the limit of the existing network for minor disturbances to cause a chain reaction.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}