I'll try recalculating for Starbucks, since not having franchisees makes the calculations easier:
Starbucks in 2019:
* Made $26.5 billion dollars
* Employed 346,000
* Average barista wage ~$12 / hour = ~$25,000 per year
* Average profit per employee = $76,589
Hold on a minute, that's Starbucks' revenue, not profit. You haven't accounted for any non-labour expense.
From its financial data (https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SBUX/financials?p=SBUX) (Yahoo link for convenience), that $26.5b revenue is directly offset by $19b in cost-of-goods-sold (including some salaries already paid). Other overhead and depreciation accounts for another $3.5bn, and interest expenses contribute $235m.
The net pre-tax profit for Starbucks is $3.9bn, and if that were distributed equally among all employees (from your figure) it would result in about $11,200/worker over and above their existing salary.
That's closer to the break-even-wage-rate that Starbucks could conceivably offer, if it's intended to have zero return on capital (about $19bn in current assets for FY2019). And that figure is volatile; if you repeat for this fiscal year you'd calculate about $3200/worker.
When Amazon made zero gross profit for a decade (or was it two?) it wasn't because they weren't making profits.
Check the financial statements again. The $26.5b figure you cite is gross revenue, of which $24.4b is operating revenue. From that revenue you deduct the $19b cost of goods sold (including salaries) to find $7.5b of operating profit, and from that you deduct depreciation and administration expenses.
New investment does not show up as an expense on a financial statement, since it builds capital -- at the accounting level it's a transformation of one asset (cash) to another (land/equipment/etc).
> McDonalds made $11 billion in 2019. They employed 210,000 people. They therefore made ~$52,400 per worker in profit.
Don’t forget that McDonalds is mostly a franchise business. They could have 0 people flipping burgers and still make 10 billion profit