I don't quite understand this topic. I know that Indegenious workers; men, women, children; mostly women, etc. migrated looking for wage work and were highly exploited. I also understand that they did their best to ignore this. From my readings, I have yet to find any discussions or readings regarding very many strikes. Although a few. It seems to me they were happy to do what they did.
There are not as many outright colonies as there once were (but there are some). However, there are so many countries with a history of colonizing or being colonies that colonialism has had a big impact on our world. Much of Africa's problems, and South America's, come from generations of unstable governments after colonialism.
In the concept of neo-colonialism, the targeted peoples are said to be controlled through trade and other monetary avenues. In a sense, one might say that neo-colonialism equates with economic and trade dominance of a strong nation over a developing nation. The voice of dissent doesn't arise from the laborers, who are happy for any means to earn their bread and provide a roof for their children; it comes, as always, from educated citizens who have perspective enough and articulation enough to speak out on behalf of the laborers, whom they see as exploited by economic powers.
This relates to the belief by many that although colonialism as a historical period is mostly over in today's world, it has been replaced by a different form of colonialism known as neo-colonialism, whereby the power discrepancies and the massive abuses of relations between the haves and the have-nots of the world is continued uninterrupted but by other means. Such people point towards the way that organisations such as the IMF and the World Bank continue and perpetuate global inequalities, and, as you indicate, the phenomenon of migrant workers that flow from less developed countries to more developed countries to form a new underclass that perform the jobs that nobody wants to do in these developed countries.