A & C, fully agree with your post no. 804. The usual contractorisation bandits run a business model which depends on chronic underpayment of their employees, on the assumption that there are 'sufficient numbers of ex-military chumps out there with their pensions in the bag' - not my words, but those of someone pushing for a major contract.
This sounds like what has killed ATC Shooting in South Wales, and rather than revisit the salary to provide a living wage for a skilled employee to run the central armoury, it's apparently simpler and easier all round to cease shooting. I am open to challenge on this, but I'll warrant that if this is contractorised, then the said contractor will still be getting paid while cadets do not get skill at arms training.
Contractorisation works well for all, as long as you negotiate a robust contract, police it, and if there is a shortfall, you get a rock and shove it all the way up the contractor's back passage. This is business. All the talk I've heard about contract 'partnerships' leads to cases like the 'pause in flying' where core capabilities are neglected and the contract provider still gets paid.
If the ATC fleet can be grounded owing to shortfalls, then those who failed need to be held to account. If this means tighter scrutiny of contracts and harsher sanctions on failing service providers, then some good will have come out of this whole goat rodeo.