The neoclassical view of the causes of unemployment is based on a model in which there is perfect competition throughout the economy. No reputable economist believes that the conditions for perfect competition exist in any actual economy. Keynesians think that departures from perfect competition are so widespread that the neoclassical model is useless as a basis for policy. The belief that unemployment can be greatly increased through cuts in wages seems to be a triumph of faith over experience. There is considerable debate about how sensitive employment is to cuts in wage rates, but all are agreed that it is cuts at the lower end that have the biggest impact.
Unskilled employment is more sensitive to rate rate cuts than skilled employment.
By and large it is the unskilled that find it the hardest to find employment, so a fall in their real wages might be thought to help. Yet, as Bob Gregory has pointed out, real wages at the bottom end of the wage distribution have not increased over the last 25 years. It could always be argued that real wages at the bottom end should have fallen over the last 25 years. In their open letter to the Prime Minister, arguing for a freeze on award wage rates. This seems wildly optimistic to me.