Globalization - Ideal Economic Environment?

In his book entitled Why globalization works, Martin Wolf argues that a striking example of state"s championing the rights and entitlements of its workers is the rising labor market regulation under Tony Blair"s government in the United Kingdom. Wolf argues that this rise in labor market regulation is proof against a "constant allegation" that government today is little more than a pawn of big business. Wolf also points to the anti-corporate activity in the United States legal system, and increasingly in the United Kingdom as well. He argues that although the popular consensus is that "trial lawyers are blight", it is evident that their work operates against the interests and desires of corporations.
Stephen D. Cohen in his book, The Making of United States International Economic Policy, Principles, Problems, and Proposals for Reform, points to the phenomenon of conservative and liberal people and groups uniting in an antipathy towards the alleged vices of globalization. These political polar opposites were united under the idea that globalization threatened the ability of the United States to control its own destiny and places too much power in the hands of faceless foreign investors. They argued that low-skilled laborers in the workforce were shouldering the burden of low paying jobs, unemployment, and reduced benefits disproportionately. And they were right. Data shows that since the 1980"s, an overwhelming percentage of income gains were enjoyed by Americans in the highest income brackets while those with lower socio--economic statuses saw little or no increase in wages. Therefore, if the case of the United States is indicative of the mechanics of globalization across the globe, then globalization is increasing the gap between rich and poor. This data makes it somewhat surprising that the backlash against globalization in the United States in the early 1990"s by both public and private sectors was unforeseen.
So, it seems that the rise of globalization in the early 1980"s indeed brought about a host of changes in the global arena. The previous standards of social responsibility that existed in the "Golden Age" and was expressed through government protection and corporate responsibility of the rights, entitlements, and general welfare of the common worker are now gone. In their place is an economic environment that is more favorable to the interests of the CEO than the common worker. Globalization has opened the once relatively localized economy for the holders of global capital who are now able to access an almost unlimited source of workers and markets across the globe, the end result being a new found and ever increasing insecurity for the working class.
However, globalization has not just affected the world on the micro--level. The shift of economic power from the hands of the government, as was characteristic of previous eras, to those who hold the capital has marked a significant change in the ways in which governments are able to enact economic policy. It is evident that governments are as dependent on capital for their health and survival as are individuals, and it is also apparent that it is globalization that has brought governments to the ends of their ability to act on the behalf of the welfare of their citizens and workers if they are to protect their own interests. Some analysts argue that governments hold and exercise more power over international corporations than they are given credit for.
If this is the case, what is to be said of the current status of the common worker here, in the developed nations, and far off in developing nations?