How much value ($) does the average fast food worker create per hour?

Actually, the argument in the video does not depend on the assertion that fast food workers are compensated in close proportion to the value they produce. Think of it this way:  at $7.50/hour Bob can hire the most productive workers who are willing to work for $7.50/hour.  Some might produce more than that in value, some less, many will produce less at first and then get up to speed, etc.  There is no necessary proportion.   A good manager will try to hire the best people and train them to be productive. If the minimum wage goes to $10/hour, then Bob does not just pay the same workers more.  Not unless he totally lacks business sense.  Instead he now has a larger pool of potential workers, all those who are willing to do the work for $10/hours.  This pool will include more experienced and more productive workers.  So again, Bob will hire the best he can get at $10/hour, train them, etc.  That's all the argument depends on, that at the higher wage he has a larger pool of applicants to pick from, and this larger pool will include more productive workers. IMHO the weakness of the argument (or at least its weakest point -- I think it is a good argument overall) is that it doesn't account for training costs. Worker turnover is expensive.  For small wage increases Bob might not want to hire different people because of the needed retraining, lost productivity, etc.

There's a bait and switch. Employers don't pay workers according to value added, they pay them according to cost. The cost of burger flipping is whatever you can induce people to flip burgers for. Now there's a correlation between cost and value adding, but only because of competition, and the dirty little secret is that no free market capitalist in their right mind tolerates competition if they can possibly squelch it, because it destroys value. If there were only one burger joint in the world, the value of a burger (what it can be sold for) would be somewhat higher because burgers are tasty and people would happily buy nearly as many of them even if they were somewhat more expensive. In this scenario, the owner doesn't suddenly have to pay the burger flippers more because they've somehow added more value, rather he/she gets to take home a larger profit. Of course, in reality there's more than one burger joint in the world, and the second and subsequent burger joints destroy some of the value of the first burger joint's burgers due to competition. (Even if people would pay $10 for a burger in isolation, you can't sell it for that if there's a joint down the street that will sell it for $5.) If the second, third, etc burger joints are constrained by minimum wage laws, then they're constrained in how much they can destroy the value of the first burger joint's burgers. Therefore much of the "value adding" seemingly done by burger flippers in a minimum-wage environment is sustained by the minimum wage in the first place.

I worked at several fast food places between ages 18-24 on and off.  I remember one Christmastime at Sonic Drive-In - the way we did our holiday party was a spread in the back that the manager provided, and everyone on their break got to participate and the shift manager tried to schedule the breaks so as many people as possible could celebrate at one time.  The manager said he could have shut the store down for an hour, but we would all have to contribute enough to reach $250 or so to get him to turn the outside lights off.  That much would cover an hour of no business.  Of course we didn't go for that and didn't give enough of a damn anyway, because the manager was the only one who really cared about that workplace.  The rest of us would have let it burn down, let alone give up money for a silly cupcake party in the back of a crappy fast food joint.  There were 6 workers on night shift, one a shift manager making $2-4 more an hour than the rest of us, who were paid between .50 to 1.25 more than minimum based on experience.  Back then minimum was $5.15.  The store did pretty decetly in its sales, so yes, the workers were producing much more labor value, about 300-400% more than they were getting paid.  The workers don't contribute to sales, much, though.  It's all location.  If they are at least moderately steady, fast food joints are fairly profitable operations, more reliable than a low-end sit-down restaurant.  High volume FF makes very good money.  Ie: Chick-Fil-A and In&Out I'm sure do VERY well.