This is pretty ridiculous, since when do companies "share" their wealth with employees based on dollars earned per square foot? They aren't owners, they're employees. As long as their compensation is comparable to other retail jobs, where's the problem? No one gets rich working retail, that sucks but that's just the way it is. You want to get rich then write some software after leaving the Apple Store.
What you say is true, as far as it goes. But the big picture is one of stagnant wages and downward mobility for a very large part of the U.S. workforce. This has been going on for 35 years or more, as the economy shifts from a manufacturing to a service basis. Most of these jobs pay less than a living wage and provide little or no opportunity for advancement. So while Apple is no worse than most and perhaps better than many in the industry, the problem of such a large part of our workforce being stuck in poorly paying, deadend jobs is very real. The only problem with the Times article is that it picks on Apple instead of a company (say, Wal-Mart) that treats their employees even worse, and fails to go after the larger issue.
----------
We recently put a job opening up on Craigslist for a small retail store in NY for pretty much a stock boy / delivery boy position at 8 bucks an hour with no health benefits. We got over 200 applicants in 7 days.
Making 12 bucks an hour, plus full medical and 401K in a mall selling computers that essentially sell themselves is pretty sweet in my opinion.
I think you are drawing entirely the wrong lesson from your example.