I do not know what the causation is here or if any theories have been formulated. Perhaps, the rich systems are pushing the productivity envelope and they value entrepreneurial innovations that will increase productivity more that systems that are still a bit behind. But that is one theory of many. Giving workers protection creates an additional bias, in favor of retaining the firm in operation. Now compare the cost of shutting down the firm for other creditors and for employees.
Employees find shut-down costlier by that amount.
As a result, they are biased in favor of keeping the firm in operation. This suggests that jurisdictions can use employee priority to cure false early liquidations, if they think that their bankruptcy law produces them. I doubt that is the case with any bankruptcy system. Even Sweeden, which does not have a liquidation procedure, experiences creditor-led bailouts that prevent false liquidations. There is a recent article in the 2000 J.Fin. by Per Stromberg along those lines.