I do agree the headline is unecessarily inflammatory, though.
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.