That is, literally and exactly, hoping that conditions for labor get worse, so while you assert that it is disingenuous and not an accurate paraphrase, that doesn't seem to be the case.
That’s not an “or” to “things get worse for labor”, that’s a cause (more competitors for the same set of openings) for the effect of “things get worse for labor”.
The world is more complex and these workers are all seeing the economic value of their labor shrink even as they earn more money. The economy needs some semblance of balance. They'll feel better off if potatoes don't cost twice as much next year.
Yes, that’s an argument for why one might wish conditions to become more adverse to labor (and its fairly expressly the argument underlying current monetary policy, and that adversity to labor may sometimes be desirable in setting monetary policy is central to the Fed’s dual mandate.)
That doesn’t change that it is wishing conditions to become more adverse to labor.
I do agree the headline is unecessarily inflammatory, though.
No it's not. If I say "I hope I can find some cheap veggies at the market today", you wouldn't be accusing me of trying to rip off a farmer.
It's a bizarre and bad faith conclusion to jump to.
You're jumping to conclusions on other people's behalf, but only picking the conclusions you have pre-decided.