I cannot see any value in distinguishing a regular hypothesis from a "working hypothesis" (especially based on your spotty definition of the latter).
As far as I can tell, simply being falsifiable makes all scientific hypotheses "working hypotheses"; they are living and dynamic, capable of being altered or entirely rejected.
As to value, a "working hypothesis" should have the same value as a regular hypothesis in as much as they appear to be the same thing.
Jon
Edited by Jon, : No reason given.
Love your enemies!