Their courage changed how one of the world's largest corporations does business
In a country where the world's largest retailer had never once sat across a bargaining table and signed a contract with its workers, a warehouse in Mississauga, Ontario has quietly rewritten that history. After two years of negotiation, Walmart distribution workers secured Canada's first collective agreement with the company — winning wage increases, workplace protections, and a settlement for unfair labour practices. The victory is less about one warehouse than about a growing recognition that the supply chain, not the storefront, is where workers hold their deepest leverage. It arrives at a moment when the gap between corporate profit and worker poverty has become too wide, and too visible, to ignore.
- Workers at a Walmart distribution centre who could not afford groceries despite full-time employment have now secured a legally binding contract guaranteeing fairer wages and working conditions.
- Walmart's decision to raise wages across the Mississauga region while deliberately excluding the unionizing warehouse exposed the company's resistance to organized labour and became the foundation of an unfair labour practice complaint.
- Unifor's strategy — targeting high-volume distribution hubs rather than individual retail stores — is designed to pressure the entire supply network, giving workers leverage over a system that serves more than 100 stores.
- A parallel battle is unfolding at an Amazon facility in British Columbia, where a labour board found the company unlawfully withheld wage increases, potentially triggering over one million dollars in back pay.
- Union leaders and economists alike see these victories as the opening of a broader campaign, comparing the current moment to the groundbreaking labour struggles of the mid-twentieth century in auto, steel, and mining industries.
In May, workers at a Walmart distribution warehouse in Mississauga, Ontario signed the first collective agreement the company has ever reached with unionized workers in Canada. The deal came after two years of negotiations and includes wage increases, working condition guarantees, and a lump sum settlement for unfair labour practices. For Unifor president Lana Payne, it was a moment of labour history — proof that workers could hold their ground against one of the most powerful corporations on earth.
The choice of facility was strategic. The Mississauga warehouse is a high-volume distribution centre supplying more than 100 stores and handling online orders across one of Walmart's largest Canadian markets. While retail locations have unionized before, the supply chain infrastructure has remained largely untouched. Unifor deliberately targeted that backbone, reasoning that distribution workers carry far more systemic leverage than those on the shop floor.
The road was not without friction. After workers voted to unionize in 2024, Walmart raised wages for workers across the region — but pointedly excluded the distribution centre where organizing was underway. That exclusion became the basis for an unfair labour practice complaint, now resolved through the new contract. Walmart declined to comment.
Unifor has already moved to a second front. At an Amazon facility in British Columbia, the provincial labour board found the company had unlawfully withheld scheduled wage increases from organizing workers while granting raises at every other regional facility. Amazon acknowledged a misunderstanding of the labour code and pledged to pay the owed compensation, estimated at more than one million dollars. Negotiations for a first contract there continue, with a mediator having already found Amazon responsible for the breakdown in bargaining.
Economist Jim Stanford sees the Walmart agreement as a crack in a larger structure of corporate power — one in which companies like Walmart and Amazon simultaneously dominate consumer prices, supplier terms, and worker wages. The contradiction, he noted, is stark: some of the world's most profitable companies employ workers who rely on food banks. With a union contract now in place, those workers have a mechanism to claim a share of the wealth they help generate — and a signal, Stanford believes, that worker consciousness is shifting in ways that will be difficult for employers to reverse.
In May, workers at a Walmart distribution warehouse in Mississauga, Ontario, signed a contract with the world's largest employer—the first collective agreement the company has ever struck with unionized workers in Canada. The deal arrived after two years of negotiation and includes wage increases, guarantees around working conditions, and a lump sum payment to settle claims of unfair labour practices. For Lana Payne, president of Unifor, Canada's largest private sector union, the moment represented something larger than one warehouse. "These members were determined to have workplace democracy and they stuck with it," she said. "Their courage and determination, their decision to be part of a collective bargaining table with one of the biggest corporations in the world, is why they made labour history."
The Mississauga facility was not chosen by accident. It is a high-volume distribution centre serving one of Walmart's largest Canadian markets, and it supplies more than 100 brick-and-mortar stores while managing online orders. Retail locations have unionized before, but the supply chain infrastructure—the backbone of modern retail—has remained largely untouched. Unifor's strategy was deliberate: target the nodes of the system where workers have the most leverage. "We felt that we needed to put serious effort into targeting the entirety of the supply chain," Payne explained. "This victory will create momentum across the warehouse sector."
The path to this agreement was not smooth. Workers first voted to unionize in 2024, but Walmart responded in ways that revealed the company's traditional hostility toward organized labour. When the company raised wages for other workers in the Mississauga region, it notably excluded the distribution centre where unionization was underway. That exclusion became the basis for an unfair labour practice complaint, which the new contract now settles. Walmart did not respond to requests for comment on the agreement.
Union leaders frame this victory as an opening move in a much larger campaign. The economic landscape has shifted dramatically in recent years, with technology and e-commerce companies reshaping how work is organized and how workers must fight for recognition. "Our labour laws are not built to be able to contend with massive corporations who can fight unionization, and so they frustrate the system," Payne said. "When you look at the situation we're in, it's not unlike what workers faced 70 years ago, when unions were really making kind of groundbreaking strides with auto workers or steelworkers or mining workers."
Unifor has already opened a second front. At an Amazon facility in British Columbia, the provincial labour board recently found that the company unlawfully withheld scheduled wage increases from workers, even as it granted raises to every other Amazon facility in the region. The board's decision means Amazon will likely owe more than $1 million in back wages. An Amazon spokesperson acknowledged the company had misunderstood the labour code and said it was now committed to providing the "updated compensation as soon as possible." Negotiations for a first contract at that facility continue, though an independent mediator has already found Amazon responsible for the breakdown in bargaining.
Jim Stanford, an economist and director of the Centre for Future Work, sees the Walmart agreement as a crack in a much larger structure of corporate power. Companies like Walmart and Amazon control not just consumer prices but also what they pay suppliers and workers. "There's an incredible contradiction between Walmart being one of the largest, most profitable companies in the world, and many of its workers having to turn to food banks because they can't buy groceries," Stanford said. With a union contract in place, workers now have a mechanism to claim a fairer share of the wealth they generate. Stanford believes the recent victories signal a broader shift in worker consciousness—a growing understanding that employers will exploit precarity unless workers organize to stop them. "Workers around the world have been struggling for years to try and win a share of Walmart's profits in the form of higher wages and better jobs," he said. "But the collective agreement with Walmart is clear. There are things that fundamentally change how one's work life unfolds, and it will make a huge difference to these workers."
Citações Notáveis
Their courage and determination, their decision to be part of a collective bargaining table with one of the biggest corporations in the world, is why they made labour history.— Lana Payne, president of Unifor
There's an incredible contradiction between Walmart being one of the largest, most profitable companies in the world, and many of its workers having to turn to food banks because they can't buy groceries.— Jim Stanford, economist and director of the Centre for Future Work
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did the union focus on distribution centres instead of retail stores, where workers had already organized?
Because a distribution centre is where the real power lives. One warehouse supplies over 100 stores and handles all the online orders. If you can disrupt that, you disrupt everything. Retail stores are visible, but they're not the chokepoint.
Walmart raised wages everywhere in the region except the unionizing warehouse. That seems deliberate.
It was. That's how you send a message—show workers what they could have gotten if they hadn't organized. It's a threat dressed up as generosity. But it also became evidence of unfair labour practice, which is why the settlement is part of this deal.
Two years from first vote to signed contract. That's a long time to hold together.
It is. And it's why Payne kept saying "their courage." Workers had to believe something would come, even when nothing was happening. Most people would have given up.
What does this mean for Amazon in British Columbia?
It means the playbook is visible now. Amazon tried the same thing Walmart did—withhold raises from one facility while giving them everywhere else. But BC's labour board caught it and ordered back pay. Now Amazon knows the cost of that strategy is higher than it thought.
Is this the beginning of something bigger?
That's what the union is betting on. They're not celebrating one warehouse. They're saying this proves supply chain workers can win, and that changes everything about how retail operates in this country.