Labour Strife at Amazon Canada

dennizn/Shutterstock

Amazon Canada, according to its website, is the largest online retailer in the country. Customers can shop for ‘millions of items’ that are delivered to them within days of purchase. It is an industry power house that continues to dominate the retail landscape. Sales have increased at record rates for Canadian businesses shipping through Amazon over the past fiscal year.

Click here to read about Amazon Canada’s record sales. 

Amazon’s mission statement is “to be Earth’s most customer-centric company”. In light of this statement and given the evidence of record growth, it seems clear that the company is thriving in the achievement of that mission.

All is not so rosy, however, on the employee and labour relations side of Amazon Canada’s growth ledger.

Since 2017, Amazon Canada has been facing allegations of numerous labour-related complaints. The United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada (UFCW Canada) has filed a complaint with the Labour Relations Board of Ontario, alleging that Amazon Canada has interfered with the legal right of employees to certify and become members of a union. UFCW Canada has claimed unfair labour practices on the part of Amazon Canada, including anti-union messaging, closing of branches and termination of employees who organized or participated in union drives in specific locations.

Click here to read about the labour complaints against Amazon Canada.

Furthermore, there are allegations that organizational leaders held ‘secret meetings’ in 2017 that focused on anti-union messages and practices.

Click here to read the allegations about ‘secret meetings’ with Amazon Canada delivery companies.

As noted in both articles, these allegations of unfair labour practices are now part of the legal proceedings underway with the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB).  If indeed the allegations are proven to be true, the OLRB may be able to impose numerous remedies which may include the reinstatement of the terminated employees and, possibly, certification as a result of management interference in a legitimate process based on the freedom and the right to unionize. If, on the other hand, the allegations are not upheld, it will be interesting to see if the union will continue in its long-term efforts to unionize Amazon Canada workers and their affiliates.

In the meantime, there is no doubt that Amazon Canada will continue in its efforts to dominate on-line shopping and delivery around the world.

Discussion Questions:

  1. Identify the legislation in Ontario that gives employees the right to certify?
  2. What are the potential risks to Amazon in their stance against certification?
  3. How does a non-union environment benefit Amazon and its workers?
  4. Does the alleged anti-union stance at Amazon Canada have any impact on your on-line purchasing and shopping patterns? Explain your rationale.

Dangerous Work

A bag of money and gavel represent many legal expenses.
Matt Benoit/Shutterstock

Some workplaces are inherently dangerous. Often we think of these dangers arising from physical or environmental agents that could cause harm to the worker on a day-to-day basis. The human element is also a very real source for contributing to a dangerous workplace, especially in organizations that serve vulnerable and disenfranchised members of our society.

Ontario’s Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care is a facility that treats patients with severe and complex mental health issues and disorders. In the spring of 2016, a patient at the center was able to access two screwdrivers and stabbed several workers, causing them serious injury.

Almost a year later, the Ministry of Labour has laid three charges against the Centre under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. These charges include the employer’s failure to take every reasonable precaution to protect workers; failure to ensure that measures and protections were established for workers; and failure to have health and safety procedures in writing.

Click here to read an article about this case.

As noted in the article, if the employer is found guilty of, or pleads guilty to, these charges they may be faced with a fine of up to $500,000 and other potential penalties.

The Waypoint Centre has responded, as noted in the article and as posted on their website.

This case shows us that policies and procedures on their own do not make workplaces safe. It is clear that the employer must engage risks proactively, especially in a high-risk workplace where danger lies in human behaviour that may be volatile and unpredictable. The employer must act in order to ensure that all persons, both employees and patients alike, are able to have some assurance of living and working in a safe environment.

Discussion Questions:

  1. As the Health and Safety Manager in this situation, what steps would you take to ensure that workers feel safe?
  2. How could you promote a safe workplace in an inherently dangerous work environment?
  3. If you were the employer in this case, how would you plead and what would be the result?