Well, yeah, obviously if you can have the best of all worlds then by all means do that, but in practice something's going to give; if you did somehow prioritize customer and employee well-being, it would almost certainly manifest in much higher prices, not actually sustaining quality, or both. (Now, charging more for a better outcome does seem like a good idea, but in practice >90% of customers will go for the cheaper option.)

Most people seem to equate employee well-being with more money.

Plenty of people care more about other job qualities than how much it pays, and a well run business can create a great environment without paying more than average. Look for companies where turnover is almost zero (assuming company is not growing) and you often find happy employees.

Places with worse employee conditions have to pay more, everything else held equal.

Anecdotally, I have certainly stayed in jobs with poorer pay because I liked my colleagues and the working conditions; but alternatively I have stayed in another job mostly because the pay was great.

How about someone that hates both? That would explain Microsoft's rise in cloud.

No man can serve two masters: for either he. will hate the one, and love the other; or else. he will hold to the one, and despise the other.