This is a wild stab in the dark, but it could be some sort of legal distancing or compartmentalization of liability. If this is a pure cost-cutting measure, it hardly seems worth the optics of this action.

If that's true I would be even less inclined to board a 737 MAX in future.

At this point my outlook is “if its a Boeing, I’m not going“

Catchy rhyme. I could see it spread in the wider population in this form - it's memegenic :).

This is the inverse of an existing well known expression, sad to say.

"If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going"

Do you even get a choice if you need to book a flight?

Some sites show it on the booking page, and if not, there are various sites* on which you can look up the flight number to see what aircraft type has been used historically. Sometimes several different types are cycled on a given flight (e.g. Boeing 777 and Airbus A350), but for many flight numbers it's always the same aircraft type.

For example, American Airlines has tons of both 737 and A320 aircraft, but AA858 seemingly always uses a 737-800 (B738):

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/aa858

* e.g. flightaware.com and flightradar24.com

Depends on the route and on the airlines available. For example, Delta doesn't currently have the 737 Max, and I highly doubt they will order it in the near future. In Germany, Lufthansa doesn't have any 737 in its fleet anymore.

Not easily or cost-effectively. You can...

... book on an airline that flies Airbus only. There may be a few of those, but it severely limits choice in airline.

... try to determine which Boeing model is used, and be willing to walk away at the gate if the plane is changed out (losing the ticket, or at best incurring a typically large change fee).

Until heads roll--actual criminal liability--then I'm afraid your point stands:

Catastrophic failures are a cost of doing business.

A more likely stab in the dark is that they were financially in some trouble after the MAX issues, have been put in further trouble by many of their customers becoming borderline bankrupt, and this is just a stereotypical cost cutting move.

Given the article describes the outsourcing company as located on the Isle of Man, and wrapped in shell companies, I have a hard time not believing legal distancing reasons or at least maybe shady tax evasion practise

That’s the contracting company, which probably domiciled for tax reasons.

Boeing seems lost. Were would they be without the military contracts - chapter 11.

Well, I guess Boeing was in trouble after the 737 and then came Covid and the associated collapse of air travel. Together with the announcement of moving the 787 production to North Carolina last week, this feels like grasping for straws.

Because beating back unions is the one thing worth the bad press.

Boeing is run via macros on Excel spreadsheets. If an action will turn a field from red to yellow or yellow to green, they will do it.

Because the union that publicized the layoff was asking for too much, and contractors can do the same job just as well and much cheape?

contractors can do the same job just as well and much cheape?

How long for? Where will contractors learn their trade in the future?