A strike wouldn't be to remove a C-level as much as really drill home the consequences of poor decisions. Individuals are still too lenient in letting themselves go through the burnout treadmill for the upper trenches to feel it.
"On October 30, 2022, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), issued a strike notice, after the Government of Ontario refused their demands for an 11.7% salary increase alongside other requests for improved working conditions."
They are not after any "change" to how things are done, just a massive 11.7% pay hike every year for the next 4 years.
Again, any example of a strike which was to force the replacement of a C-Level?
I'm not trying to refute your point. You're allowed to be a little less aggressive.
Point being strikes typically hit C-levels indirectly, not directly. A short term loss and display of collective power which could be avoided with foresight. Individuals are more often targeted through boycotting.
So in the case of CUPE asking for 11.7% increase in pay, who is the C-Level involved, and what is the "point" they are trying to make besides simply demanding more money?
How about this "strike"?
"The 2019 General Motors strike began September 15, 2019, with the walkout of 48,000 United Automobile Workers from some 50 plants in the United States. Demands by workers included increased job security, gateway for temporary workers to become permanent, better pay and retaining healthcare benefits."
what was the impact to the C-level? how did them demanding job security and better pay relate to them at all?
There is pretty much NO case of union action ever attempting to impact directly or indirectly a C-Level person.
They strike for Benefits, money, job security and that is about it.
I eagerly await your examples.