Well ... imo the biggest plus is the extra leeway it gives one with respect to some of the major parameters, such as, White Balance (WB), exposure, etc. Many of these can be changed and rechanged as required (without the same destruction that takes place with non-RAW methods) to optimize your photo.
This may help a new comer even more as the chances that they might not have the WB or exposure set exactly is higher than for someone more experienced.
For example, the WB does not have to be set at all really ... use auto WB in the camera and adjust as required in the RAW converter software very easily. If you use jpeg this is harder to do although color balance can be adjusted to a considerable degree as well.
Using RAW can help when you blow out an area of your photo (something that's all too common). In RAW you can recover the highlights better than in jpeg where you're pretty much out of luck (although if you're over exposed by two or more stops you'll be out of luck even in RAW unless you're pretty good at post processing).
Also the data in RAW is 16 bits (actually 12 or 14) versus 8 bits in jpeg. This can help the image quality if you do a lot of post processing. For example, 8 bits give 256 levels for each of the R, G and B channels while 12 bits give 4096 levels in each. At each stage of post processing some data can be lost ... higher bits will make the impact less.
There are other pros (and cons ... such as file size and required computing power, etc) but this hopefully give you some idea.
Imo shooting in RAW does not really make the workflow more difficult and because of the potential advantages is worthwhile. Having said that a good photographer/post processor can do wonders using either.
Very quick summary but hope this helps a little.