That wasn't my take from the article. If anything, it sounds like he's calling out employers for profiting (significantly) from the same kind of word-bending you're describing: by telling low-wage earners, when they show up for work the first day, "Oh BTW, you're not getting paid for setting up and tearing down your workspace each day. Because you know, that's not really work."

BTW it may be more accurate to describe the authors as policy researchers, rather than journalists.

Standard bar exam question:

Inside warehouse, worker hides pallet of expensive goods by surrounding it with cheaper goods. Boss cannot find the expensive pallet. Worker has stolen the goods, even though none have left the warehouse. He has converted them from his boss's possession to his own constructive possession. Just like a boss that withholds wages, worker cannot suddenly make the pallet appear once the cops show up. The theft has occurred even if the thief later returns the goods.