It probably would generate some support if it was something the workers actually asked for, rather than being something middle-class people did to wash their hands of Amazon.
e.g.
Could the consumer-led boycott potentially hurt the people it purports to support?
www.harpersbazaar.com
“Supporters and labor advocates have cautioned blindly promoting the boycott, as it might hurt unionization efforts and obscure the actual needs of the worker-led movement.”
"I understand the urge to support these workers, and they certainly need all the solidarity they can get right now during this stressful and contentious election period.
Listening to them about what they actually need is paramount,"
tweeted labor writer Kim Kelly. "Amplify
@BAmazonUnion, and follow their lead."
C. M. Lewis, an editor at labor publication Strikewave,
tweeted, "RWDSU
could legally call for a consumer boycott on Amazon since only secondary boycotts—not direct boycotts—are illegal.
they are not doing so. defer to their judgment."
If boycotts aren’t co-ordinated with strikes, or otherwise timed for when workers actually request them, then their effect, if any, is only going to be to reduce the number of jobs available rather than lead to any actual improvement in conditions.