When Dysfunction Becomes Normal: A Reaction to Amazon’s Exit from Quebec

On September 26, 2025, the Montreal Gazette published a headline that immediately caught my eye:
“Closing of Quebec Amazon warehouses was ‘a profound attack on the working class,’ tribunal told”.

The framing is predictable: a powerful multinational company abandons Quebec, workers are left without jobs, and the villain is Amazon. But when you look a little closer, the story is more complicated—and, in my view, more revealing of a deeper sickness in Quebec’s political and cultural DNA.

This article is my reaction to the Gazette piece, but also a broader reflection on why Quebec keeps sabotaging itself. What’s happening with Amazon is not an isolated “attack on workers,” but rather the entirely predictable outcome of Quebec’s entrenched union culture, bureaucratic inertia, and an almost proud acceptance of dysfunction as a way of life.

The Amazon Situation, Simplified

Let’s start with the facts.

• Amazon announced the closure of seven warehouses in Quebec, affecting around 1,700 permanent employees and hundreds more temporary ones.
• The official explanation? Cost optimization and a shift toward third-party carriers.
• The timing, however, is no coincidence. Amazon’s only unionized Canadian warehouse was in Laval, and union organizers were gaining momentum elsewhere in the province.
• The company chose the cleaner option: shut it all down, rather than face years of tribunal hearings, certification battles, and restrictive labour rules.

Cue outrage. Unions call it “a profound attack on the working class.” Politicians shake their fists. Comment sections fill with finger-pointing at “corporate greed.”

But here’s the question no one wants to ask: why does this keep happening in Quebec? Why here, and not Ontario, Alberta, or B.C.?

Quebec’s Love Affair with Dysfunction

I’ve worked both under a union and as a manager in a unionized environment. The contrast between the principle of collective bargaining and the reality on the ground is staggering.

The principle makes sense: workers standing together for fair treatment. But in Quebec, union leadership often becomes a magnet for abrasive, combative personalities. The culture drifts from advocacy into obstruction, from negotiating in good faith into adversarial performance.

And the government enables it—because dysfunction here isn’t just tolerated, it’s institutionalized.

Bureaucracy as a Way of Life

Try getting a construction permit in Quebec. Or registering a business. Or even booking a government appointment. Everything is slow, layered with red tape, and insulated from accountability.

The “service” you get is less about helping you solve a problem than about defending the system itself.

The irony? People working inside this machine often seem perfectly content. Job security, generous benefits, and a culture of “it’ll get done when it gets done” create a false sense of comfort. Many genuinely don’t see the dysfunction because, for them, it works.

This is the same cultural mindset that trickles into union politics, labour tribunals, and regulatory bodies. Stagnation isn’t seen as failure—it’s seen as stability.

Why Amazon Walked Away

From a corporate perspective, Quebec represents a nightmare scenario:

• Regulatory uncertainty: Once a union begins organizing, you’re looking at years of certification hearings and tribunal oversight.
• Rigid labour code: Quebec gives unions broad leverage, leaving companies with limited room to adapt operations.
• Political grandstanding: Provincial leaders posture as defenders of the working class, but rarely offer real solutions.

So Amazon ran the numbers. They could stay and fight, spending millions in legal fees, or they could cut their losses and restructure around Quebec. The decision was cold, rational, and—let’s be honest—predictable.

Workers lost jobs not because Amazon is evil, but because Quebec’s system is designed to make operations here as unattractive as possible.

A Province That Punishes Efficiency

This isn’t just about Amazon. It’s about a pattern. Quebec has built a culture that punishes efficiency and rewards obstruction.

• If you’re a business, you deal with endless inspections, licensing delays, and shifting regulations.
• If you’re an entrepreneur, you hit walls of bureaucracy that smother agility.
• If you’re a worker, you’re told the union is your only shield—until the shield becomes a cage, cutting off opportunities altogether.

The result? The most combative voices get promoted, both in government and in labour movements, while ordinary citizens quietly lose out.

The False Sense of Comfort

What bothers me most is not the dysfunction itself—it’s the widespread acceptance of it.

Inside Quebec’s government offices, unions, and institutions, people enjoy rock-solid job security. They work within a system where delay is normal, inefficiency is expected, and confrontation is rewarded. From their vantage point, there’s nothing wrong.

But for businesses trying to invest, for employees who actually want opportunity, and for citizens who want services that work, this is corrosive. The complacency is worse than corruption because it’s so ordinary, so invisible, and so baked into the culture that it almost feels untouchable.

The Cost of Complacency

When people describe Amazon’s departure as an “attack on the working class,” they miss the bigger picture.

The real attack is internal. It comes from Quebec’s refusal to modernize its institutions, streamline its bureaucracy, and temper its union culture with realism.

The tragedy isn’t that Amazon chose to leave. The tragedy is that no one inside Quebec’s system will learn from it. The union leaders will double down. The government will hold more hearings. And the people who pay the price—the workers themselves—will be told to stay angry at the wrong target.

Historical Patterns: Not the First, Not the Last

This isn’t Amazon’s problem alone. Quebec has a long history of driving away opportunity:

• Energy projects have been canceled after years of delay, leaving billions on the table.
• Manufacturing firms have scaled back or relocated due to rigid labour and regulatory demands.
• Construction projects are infamous for corruption inquiries, cost overruns, and glacial permitting processes.

In each case, the narrative repeats: outsiders are blamed, insiders remain secure, and the cycle of dysfunction rolls on.

Final Thoughts

The Gazette’s headline paints Amazon as the aggressor. But if we’re honest, Amazon simply made a rational business decision in an irrational environment. Quebec’s deep-rooted union culture, its bureaucratic inertia, and its cultural acceptance of dysfunction made staying here a losing proposition.

Workers deserved better. They deserved leaders and a government willing to put practicality over posturing. Instead, they got what Quebec always seems to deliver: red tape, grandstanding, and lost opportunities.

If we keep telling ourselves that this dysfunction is “normal,” we shouldn’t be surprised when companies keep walking away.

What do you think?
Is Quebec defending its workers, or slowly strangling its own future?