Because they produced a societally useful good or service

Exactly! So does the capitalist who created the successful business and set the parameters for the employees to create value not deserve anything either?

The difference is the risk vs reward. The employer risks far more capital, and therefor reaps a far larger reward if successful. And that's a very big if. The employee has far less risk, but also far less reward for their time.

If an employee loses their job, they have no income. They have no assets to sell. They are already destitute and living on what meager savings they have, without insurance.

Again, this isn't true. You're making claims for individual people and then applying it to workers as a whole. People have agency, some of us are better prepared than others. Some of us think ahead for when these situations arise.

If I lost my job tomorrow, I wouldn't be destitute for a minimum of 6 months. Longer if I chose to be more frugal. I know lots of people who own rental property but have regular jobs. Even you couldn't argue that they'd be destitute. Why are you assuming everyone is a broke dumbass with no agency?

You were fortunate enough to have the ability to leave. For many, the choice is losing income to theft or being unhoused

I'll probably be unhoused soon. It's not my employers fault. Why would I expect someone else to handle my problems? Luckily I have agency, and this current system allows me the freedom to choose what my next move is, and I sure think I'm lucky for living somewhere that allows this.

I guess I could cry about losing my apartment because capitalism, but I don't see things that way.