The main way that the bourgeoisie tries to fight legislation beneficial to the proletariat is by arguing that government intervention only makes things worse. They say that its stagnant bureaucrats has no place meddling in the economy. They say that its corrupt politicians want to control your life. They say that its greedy taxmen will steal your hard-earned money. To their credit, the government isn't perfect, not by a long shot. But it is far better than they are.
The big misconception that the bourgeoisie get you to believe is that power not held by the government is automatically power held by the people. This is wrong. “The people” are far too diverse and broad a group to effectively wield it. Instead, it is held by the bourgeoisie themselves. Why? Well, the two main wielders of power in this country are the government and the bourgeoisie. They both use people as their main resource, either for taxation or labor. While the government has most forms of power, capitalism has forced it to cede the majority of economic power to the bourgeoisie. Wanting to preserve their power while also gaining more, the bourgeoisie seek to undermine the government's control, urging for a “free market”.
In reality, our country is run by these two groups, and weakening one tends to strengthen the other. But if we're forced to pick between this pair of shitty options, which one is less shitty? I believe it is the government. If the government loses control over the economy, you are not free. Instead, you and the economy are controlled by the bourgeoisie. Say what you will about the government, at the very least, it has to claim that it acts in the best interests of the people. Its enshrined duty is to provide life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to every American, and it must at a minimum pretend to do that. The bourgeoisie, on the other hand, make no such promises. They act in their own best interests, not anyone else's, and the actions they commit involve exploiting the proletariat as much as possible. The choice between an definitely selfish group and an allegedly altruistic one shouldn't be that difficult.
But what of our control over each? By not owning the means of production, the proletariat is always in an inherently subservient position to the bourgeoisie, and even with the strength of numbers, victories against them will always be hard-won. In contrast, our government is democratic, meaning that we choose who controls it. This isn't total control for a number of reasons, such as career politics, the two-party system, and bourgeoisie lobbying, but it is at least some. Barring a semi-rare fuck-up by the electoral college, the will of the people is what decides who gets to focus the government's power. And while people can “vote with their wallets/labor” in the free market, the bourgeoisie's votes are far more powerful.
There are those who say that picking the government over the bourgeoisie is meaningless since the bourgeoisie buy politicians, I believe that that's reductive. The bourgeoisie do control a significant part of the government and the government does often uphold the bourgeoisie will, but the fact that those politicians need to be bought at all means that bourgeoisie control over the government isn't absolute. It means that we still have a foothold to defend and regain.
In conclusion, I'm not asking you to like the government. I'm asking you to put control over this country in the hands of the entity that exists for us rather than the one that doesn't, for the entity that we control over the one we don't. We have our labor laws because the government put them in place to the chagrin of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie want to keep the market free so that the government is unable to regulate their exploitation. And even if you still view the government as the bourgeoisie's toady, it simply makes more sense to deal with their infiltration than to surrender to them entirely