Are zero-hours contracts really worse than ‘jobs for life’?

We've always had 'zero-hours' contracts in one form or another. It used to be possible to employ people on a 'casual' basis but when that was outlawed we moved to agency workers. The same thing but with a bunch of rent-seeking spivs adding a considerable overhead in return for a veneer of respectability.

Zero hours contracts are not necessarily a bad thing. We've always had bad employers, regardless of how workers are employed.

Many are flouting the laws as they stand, I know of one national 'charity' that make Sports Direct look like Saints; you won't be reading about them in the Guardian though.