Good point, some reasons:

1. The manager is (probably) making too much for working too hard, and
2. Fast food outlets aren't hiring enough workers.

I have no idea how much a $FAST_FOOD_JOINT manager should be making in a not-totally-screwed-up economy, but this used to work like this:

1. The manager shouldn't be making the damn food, unless a third of his workforce called in with the flu, or an employee needs to run home for emergency family time (e.g., kid sister just popped a 104° fever in school and mom and dad are both working).
2. The employees should be teenagers, well motivated by their first paychecks (and time away from the 'rents in an adult-like capacity), read "money to blow on stupid teenager shit, and/or dropped in a school fund."

How it works now:

1. The employees are adults, with indissoluble responsibilities. The kid sister above, is now a kid (below replacement, a problem) or three kids (above replacement, but a lot more school emergencies.) No, FFJ employees were never 100% teens, but it was a lot easier with that labor pool, and almost all the adults at better jobs.
2. Neither the teens, nor the adults they turn into, learn to value hard work and responsibility in school (heavily unionized). The white kids learn they (and the society their ancestors built) are inherently evil and exploitive, while the colored kids learn that The Man is out to get them, and society owes them. Most of those kids will not want to come in at 3am to make biscuits for a special order.

Here is our first vicious circle: not enough kids means more adults at these jobs, making it harder to have more kids, and making having kids more expensive, since teens cannot get a part-time job.

Now for the big vicious circle, a self-feeding loop of hate. Why not just hire more employees to fill those jobs? The taxes and forced payments imposed on businesses by the government:

1. SocialSecurity/FICA (1936): Ponzi scheme; impoverishes people; and sucks the money out of the banks that should be financing economic growth and sharing the wealth to the working class.
2. Employer-sponsored health insurance tax break (ESI) (1942/51): neo-Feudalistic; impoverishes people; sucks even more money out of banks; discriminates against the elderly, the disabled, children, small business, self-employed (like, writers). Also creates a need to squeeze out older employees.
3. Medicare (1965): pure Socialism; fills need created by ESI; impoverishes your grandchildren; no salary cap unlike FICA, so all Medicare recipients are welfare queens.
4. COBRA (1985): "allows" private individuals to purchase HC at the massively inflated costs of ESI. Basically insanity made law.
5. Senate health reform of 1987: cooked up in the Democratic Senate, not Reagan's White House, it took the caps off insurance costs, leading to:
6. Obamacare/ACA (2009): Cements into place all the above terrible decisions about health care costs and drastically raised the rates, taxing workers to pay for the unemployeds' "free" HC.

So Social Security and Medicare are Socialist, while ESI is neo-feudalism. Neither are capitalist. Also, 85% of K-12 children are in government schools, including colleges, while almost all the private universities take federally-guaranteed loans, so they are beholden to the government.

So don't tell me about the failures of capitalism.

What would a capitalist, rip-it-all-out capitalist health care system look like? Something like a Health and Retirement Savings Account (HRSA) bank, which do not exist... yet:

https://somercet.blogspot.com/2020/08/the-health-care-mess-and-how-we-got-here.html