I think a ratio of pros to cons is a bit of a loony way to look at things. You can have a massive list of mild cons, but one or two massive pros. For example.
Pros:
Pays £50k a year.
It's easy.
It's interesting.
Cons:
You have a weekly catch up meeting.
The free coffee is shit.
Your colleagues might be fucking boring.
Your manager is an arsehole.
The commute is an hour each way.
The commute is expensive.
You have to take part in Secret Santa every year.
It's a 9 to 5.
In this case, I've basically outlined every typical full time job. If your ratio system made any sense, then nobody would be in work...ever.
Basically, you only really need a couple of major benefits to offset a shitload of drawbacks.
Being harmful to health is highly subjective. It's easy to think that a vast majority of zero hour contract people are single mums on the breadline that can't get any other work, but I refuse to believe that is the case.
My wife was on a zero hour contract for 2 years...we have two kids and a mortgage...her main motivation was to have some sort of flexibility and her second motivation was to keep a foot in the door with some kind of work.
Zero hours contracts work two ways, the employer has no obligation to give you any work and you have no obligation to take it. So you could in theory juggle a few zero hour contracts then pick and choose the work you want when it fits. That's a massive pro!
Biting the hand that feeds IT
