The problem that you will have, is getting "leaders" of industry to accept that "Employees need money, in order to engage in market activity, which is what is necessary for you to make sales."
As long as they spend fewer total dollars on things like "Hyper aggressive advertising", and "Monopoly building bullshit", and get "Reliable sales growth" for their trouble, they will thumb their collective noses at the notion of increasing the money available to their employees.
You see this all over with 'BOOST SALES! BOOST SALES!! FOR THE LOVE OF MAMMON, BOOST SALES!!" during recessions and depressions-- They allocate lots of resources to salesmen and marketing firms-- but then lay off employees like there is no tomorrow.
Government may try to intercede, and offer "bailouts", with the express intent that these industry leaders SHOULD use that money to keep employees employed (So that they have liquidity, so that economic activity can continue), but 9 times out of 10, these leaders just funnel that money straight into the aggressive sales garbage disposal, and STILL lay off the employees.
Until you have a workable plan to twist those ears, and force the industry leaders to actually do what is needed for the market to enter recovery (which is NOT in their immediate short-term best interests, being a derivative of the Prisoner's Dilemma), they will *ALWAYS* misuse the bailout money.
The time that such an intercession actually *WORKED*, was when the government *ITSELF* entered the scene, and offered employment. This cut out the dumbfucks who insist on trying to boost sales instead of keeping people employed with the money intended to save the economy, and put people directly to work. The money the workers got for doing the work the government paid them to do, allowed the economy to enter recovery. It's how we got out of the great depression.
Every time we have tried to just give money to "Employers", it has been a lesson in epic misuse.