Neither exist for the benefit of the other. The employee continues to work for the corporation as long as he/she feels that the payment received is more valuable than the service rendered, and the employer feels the converse is true. Just like when you buy gas for your vehicle, you feel the 22 miles you will be able to travel are more valuable than the $2.25 you paid for the gallon of gas. The retailer feels the converse is true. The framers saw the inherent wisdom in this concept of Win/Win and attempted to secure it with the right of individuals to make contracts. The government has subsequently subverted this in the blue states by dictating certain jobs be union jobs.
I would offer that while your point is valid, your example is specious. People shell out money for gas because they Have to travel to and from work. They resist shelling it out for non-necessities. And that is counted on - that they *must* shell out the money for the essentials. To that extent - playing with the price is a form of extortion in most people's minds.