Earlier quoted context omitted.
Employers are the buyers of labour. If food prices depend on what the consumer can bear, then labour prices should depend on what the employer can bear. And most of them can bear a lot more than they're currently paying.
It is a market. Employers and consumers will pay what they have to be satiated. If they can’t afford that, they’ll have to make do with less. If something is priced too high and there are viable alternatives, they’ll consider those alternatives.
Most corporate cultures are inherently authoritarian, with money being used as a proxy for power.
Empirically there is plenty of evidence that given a choice, many businesses would rather maintain the power differential and complain about "lack of applicants" than increase pay and suffer a corresponding diminution of authority.
Stock is an even more specific proxy for power, which is why stock options that have real value are usually reserved for those at the top of the hierarchy.
This is also why remote working is unpalatable. Even if it increases productivity it also enhances worker autonomy and reduces the power differential. That's not acceptable in an authoritarian culture.
Attitudes to remote work can be a useful indicator of how central hierarchy is in the culture.