Last May, Quebec’s Administrative Labour Tribunal certified a union of roughly 230 workers at an Amazon warehouse in Laval, a suburb just outside Montreal, Quebec. Following an inspiring campaign involving the Immigrant Workers Centre, workers joined the Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN) and became the first to unionize an Amazon facility in Canada.

In an act of clear retaliation, on January 22 Amazon announced its intention to shutter all of its Quebec operations, displacing nearly two thousand workers, union and nonunion alike. The move has left many grappling with its causes and implications for workers.

Closing warehouses in Quebec is intended as both a punishment for the unionized workers in Laval and a warning to others across Canada who might consider organizing. But the company’s bluster shouldn’t be mistaken for invincibility. Its restructuring in Quebec is as much a sign of vulnerability as it is strength. Now is the time for workers and unions to take stock of the structural opportunities for organizing at Amazon.

The Specificities of Quebec

It’s no surprise that the first Canadian Amazon facility to unionize was in Quebec. Quebec is a unique jurisdiction, both in terms of its labor law and its labor movement.

Quebec has the second-highest union density among Canadian provinces, with just under 40 percent of workers covered by a collective agreement. Its private sector union density stands at 23 percent — well above the national average of 15 percent. As a result, workers in Quebec are not only more likely to be union members but also more likely to have familiarity with unions and the labor movement.

Unions in the province are also much more centrally coordinated than in other parts of the country, with most belonging to larger federated bodies of labor. This is especially the case in the public sector, but not exclusively so, as coordinated strikes across the hotel sector last year demonstrated. Perhaps most notably, workers and unions in Quebec go on strike much more frequently than is the case in the rest of Canada.

A good example is Quebec’s Common Front public sector strikes of late 2023 and early 2024, which nearly broke the record for most days lost to work stoppages since the government began collecting comparable data in the 1940s. In 2023 alone, Quebec accounted for 70 percent of the more than 6.5-million-person days lost to strikes in Canada. Even in more typical years, Quebec leads the country in labor militancy, with 61 percent of all Canadian strikes over the past decade occurring in the province.

In other words, Quebec is a province where workers fight back, and unions are more active than elsewhere in Canada.

Quebec also has one of the most worker-friendly labor law regimes of any province in Canada. Like British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and the federal jurisdiction, Quebec has card-check unionization, making it easier for workers to form or join unions. Following CSN’s certification at Amazon, the company attempted to argue before Quebec’s Labour Tribunal that card-check is unconstitutional because it deprives workers of a right to vote on unionization. Predictably, the tribunal rejected this ridiculous case.

Lastly, workers in the province have recourse to first-contract arbitration when newly unionized employers refuse to bargain. In Amazon’s case, having slow-walked negotiations since last July, it was staring down the prospect of the labor board imposing a collective agreement through arbitration. Rather than let a first union contract set a precedent for workers across Quebec and beyond, Amazon opted to close up shop.

What Comes Next?

The fallout from Amazon’s decision to close its seven facilities in Quebec will no doubt be severe. Nearly two thousand workers will lose their jobs, and the example of shuttered operations may well have a chilling effect on other union organizing.

Amazon opened its first warehouse in Quebec in 2020, later expanding its footprint to meet rising demand. However, the company’s modest warehousing presence in the Quebec market made it easier to justify pulling up stakes so quickly.

Rather than allow a unionized facility to secure a contract, Amazon will now be required to pay a considerable amount of termination pay to the thousands of workers, union and nonunion, at the impacted facilities. Under Quebec law, when a company dismisses three hundred or more workers they must provide each worker sixteen weeks’ notice or equivalent pay in lieu.

If the union challenges the closure in court and proves it was retaliation, Amazon could face an even steeper financial penalty — similar to the settlement Walmart was forced to pay after closing a unionized store in Quebec.

It remains to be seen how the Quebec and federal governments will respond. Ottawa has condemned the closure, but taken no meaningful action. Quebec, however, has leverage: it could threaten to cut business ties with Amazon or end the various other economic incentives provided to the company. As economist Jim Stanford has pointed out, the province could also consider its system of “decreeing” collective agreements, extending union contracts to nonunion shops to prevent unfair competition.

However, waiting for governments or the courts to come to the rescue is a recipe for failure. Many workers know this and are organizing accordingly.

Amazon’s Strategic Vulnerabilities in Canada

Amazon’s Quebec exit may be appalling, but there are reasons for optimism — and, importantly, to double down on organizing the company’s Canadian operations.

Though many mainstream media outlets are claiming Amazon is fully “closing” its Quebec facilities, this is not accurate. Instead, the company will restructure along two lines. First, it will shift back to third-party contractors to fulfill and deliver orders. Second, and perhaps most significant, it may opt to service the Quebec market from its much larger facilities in neighboring Ontario. This shift highlights the company’s vulnerabilities.

Amazon already relies on subcontracted delivery services across Canada, disguising them as “local businesses” when, in reality, these firms contract exclusively with the company under strict terms — including the amount of compensation allotted for workers. This model allows Amazon to evade labor laws and fragment organizing efforts. It would be a tremendous challenge, but if governments classified Amazon as a “joint employer” of contracted workers, it could make it easier to unionize subcontracted workers.

Warehouses, however, are where workers hold structural power. With its Quebec closure and the prospect of more orders coming through Ontario, Amazon is effectively signaling this fact. Some speculate that the company may subcontract operations out of the very warehouses it is leaving behind, but its ability to do so is limited. After all, it expanded its warehousing footprint in the province to exercise more control in the first place.

Moreover, Amazon’s business model hinges on direct control over its warehouse, where it deploys its surplus-generating technologies and hyperexploitative labor practices. Its key investments are in Ontario, particularly around the Greater Toronto Area, where it has concentrated capital and logistics. If Quebec’s orders now flow through these sites, it only reinforces the strategic importance of organizing there.

In other words, while Amazon may appear to have cut and run in Quebec, it can’t do so everywhere. It has already put down roots in major Canadian centers and it’s not about to abandon these capital investments and the lucrative Canadian markets they serve. Its business model depends on proximity to customers and the speed that comes from controlling workers and capital in fixed locations.

Setbacks like those in Quebec are understandably difficult, but as the saying goes, “Don’t mourn, organize.” Thankfully, Amazon workers throughout Canada are already doing just that. Amazon can’t run forever.