Maple Maoists

For longtime activists and observers of the Canadian labor movement, the irony of Bruske’s response was striking. From the middle of the 1980s onward, the labor movement had fought tooth and nail against free trade. Now, nearly forty years after the Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) came into effect, it finds itself defending that very framework. Such a shift, however, is hardly without precedent. The Canadian labor movement has long had a complex and ever-changing relationship with free trade, especially with the US.

In the immediate postwar years, Canadian unions embraced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the broader consensus supporting economic integration. Initiatives like 1965’s Auto Pact with the United States were hailed by some as examples of how continental trade agreements could benefit Canadian workers.

By the late 1960s and into the ’70s, however, as the Canadian left embraced a more nationalist orientation, the CLC became more cautious. They feared that left-nationalist critiques of foreign (mainly US) ownership of the economy could lead to job losses.

The influence of left-nationalist thought during this period should not be underestimated. While groups like the Waffle advanced radical proposals, nationalist thinking resonated across the political spectrum. This pressure spurred government interventions such as the establishment of the Foreign Investment Review Agency in 1973 and the creation of Petro-Canada in 1975. Even Canadian Maoists flirted with nationalist stances rooted in anti-American sentiment.

Labor, Nationalism, and Free Trade

The CLC came to the left-nationalist position as the postwar consensus broke down, federal and provincial governments increasingly interfered in collective bargaining, and the recession of the early 1980s took hold. However, these left-nationalist positions were very much grounded in corporatist and class collaborationist strategies aimed at strengthening Canadian capital against foreign competition.

By the late 1980s, as the push for free trade gathered steam on both sides of the border, the labor movement opposed CUSFTA and threw itself into the fight against the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), forging transnational links with unions in Mexico and across Latin America. Despite these efforts, NAFTA was implemented, followed by fourteen additional free-trade agreements (FTAs), with another twenty-nine currently under negotiation.

Opposition to FTAs was never unanimous. Some Québécois unions embraced NAFTA after opposing the FTA with the United States, viewing it as an opportunity for Quebec to become less economically dependent on the rest of Canada.

Anti-FTA sentiment experienced a recent boost around the renegotiation of NAFTA into the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) beginning in 2017. Canadian unions like Unifor — which represents autoworkers — initially pursued internationalist strategies, collaborating with US and Mexican unions. But in 2019, when General Motors announced that it would relocate much of its Oshawa vehicle production to Mexico, Unifor changed tack and called on Canadians to boycott Mexican-made cars in a campaign that had nationalistic — and even xenophobic — overtones. These kinds of reactions underscore the lack of a cohesive, long-term strategy among many Canadian unions regarding trade and the technological transformations of work.

Trump’s tariff threats have brought back familiar patterns. Unions like Unifor and the Canadian branch of the United Steelworkers (USW) have joined the newly formed Canada-US Trade Council (CUSTC), alongside industry associations like the Aluminium Association of Canada, the Canadian Steel Producers Association, and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. Notably, the Business Council of Canada (BCC) — like its US equivalent a key promoter of neoliberal restructuring — is also part of this alliance. With the BCC complaining about federal government spending — at a modest 2.1 percent of GDP deficit — this alliance of convenience cannot last long if Canada really does head into economic trouble stemming from US tariffs.

The Bigger Picture

Despite all the rhetoric of standing up for workers, forming alliances with captains of industry does not inspire confidence. Once again — at a time of economic uncertainty — some unions are making alliances with capital. Adding to the irony is the surreal sight of unions defending free trade — something millennial and younger Canadian trade unionists and activists have never witnessed in their lifetimes.

Organizing among members and within wider society does not seem be a priority at this moment. However, if economic crisis materializes, it will become unavoidable if the labor movement wishes to have any relevance at all. Recent organizing victories, like Walmart warehouse workers in Mississauga and the expansion of unions into Canadian Starbucks locations — and increased public sector worker militancy after the COVID-19 pandemic — signal alternate paths forward. These routes could prioritize organizing the unorganized and directly challenging Canada’s entrenched austerity consensus.

There is also an opportunity to build a more robust labor internationalism. Canadian unions have the chance to go beyond the inconsistent efforts seen during previous battles against FTAs. Capital operates internationally, even if many unions continue to cling to the idea of taming it on a national level. It is a lesson that many still need to learn.

The threat of economic disruption is real. But as private sector union density continues to decline in Canada, falling back into cross-class and cross-partisan alliances to simply defend the status quo is not going to cut it. A temporary victory against tariffs will do nothing against demands for austerity, increasing automation, and the everyday attempts by capital to squeeze workers — pressures that will only grow if Canada’s economy continues to stagnate. It is time for a new strategy, and the battle against Trump’s tariffs may be the catalyst for change.