Yes, I understand the distinction of the two market but I'm only trying to make the observation that a monopoly of labor is espically hurtfull because the market is inelastic. As a matter of fact, most labor markets are highly inelastic compared to any other kind of market. The more inelastic the market the higher the prices a monopoly can charge, thus getting more than what is optimally efficient for the economy overall.
Small town labor markets have far less flexibility than larger urban areas. Both employees AND employers have fewer options available. However, due to economies of scale, it is the employer who holds monopolistic control over the working relationship unless there is at least the potential for labor organization to balance the negotiation process.