I'd come to a similar conclusion. The strategy being played out by the political leaders seems to be based on the following simple priorities.
2. Party members
3. Party voters
4. Potential swing voters
5. No-one else counts
Boris is fresh so only has to worry about the general election. Any deal or even no deal is good enough to get the Tories back in (i.e. "Get it done"). Simply not enough time to scrutinise the current deal so plenty of spin before the election about how good it will be before we all realise what it is.
Swinson is fresh so safe for now, repealing A50 buys the remainer votes. Husband funded by EU. Big risk that Boris renders them irrelevant again
Steptoe is stale so more concerned about priority 1 so bends whichever ways the party tells him -> no consistency. General election will see him replaced soon afterwards
Krankie is stale so has to play to her own voters
Arlene is stale and has lost leverage so now has to play to her own voters
Brexit Party - All about Nigel. He has learnt that we can only understand one thing at a time (Brexit) so doesn't mention immigration. Wants no-deal and to disappear or extension+election. He is very careful not to over-criticise Boris on his LBC show in case he needs to make a deal with him.
UKIP - I get their emails, they have self-destructed. Batten tried to do Brexit and Immigration at the same time and was blown away by the PC response.
Workers rights have been deteriorating since 1992, prior to that the target was a 35 hour working week (forgotten about now), retirement at 60 and final salary pensions still existed in many companies and the public sector.
I've certainly made similar points before. How many political campaigns have been run on the basis of "change"? Inertia is bad. Resistance to change is described as fear of change. Continual churn is normal. Nothing can remain the same forever, with forever being a continuously deminishing period of time.
Only the nature of our political relationship with Europe must remain exempt.