"Volatile pay linked to health problems" is not an endorsement of full time employment. There is no need to force this into a false dichotomy between full time

"Volatile pay linked to health problems" is not an endorsement of full time employment. There is no need to force this into a false dichotomy between full time employment and volatile pay. In fact, the article specifically mentions an instance in when they happen at the same time: >Sayre conducted a final online survey with 252 higher-income employees in finance, marketing and sales who relied on commissions or bonuses for a smaller fraction of their income. The workers completed monthly surveys for three months, and pay volatility was less harmful to health when they were less reliant on commissions or bonuses. Stress is bad for your health. Pay volatility causes stress. This is not academics advocating for full time employment. This is academics advocating for less volatile forms of payment. I'm a little surprised that a community that traditionally receives a percentage of our compensation in nebulous equity that can be worth either nothing or millions wouldn't understand that uncertainty over your compensation is frustratingly stressful.