83. On the eve of the opening of the arbitration hearing for the six female workers, the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) called to inquire about the case preparation.

On the morning of November 14, 2006, Zhang Jun reported to the ACFTU on the case of Liu Meizhen and five other female workers suing Aoliwei Company for illegal termination of their labor contracts, noting that the hearing would be held the following day.

At 8:00 p.m. that evening, Director Wang called Zhang Jun to ask about the progress of the hearing preparation and inquired, "Have you hired a lawyer?"

Zhang Jun replied, "We have not hired a lawyer."

Director Wang continued to ask, "Have you contacted the Shandong Provincial Federation of Trade Unions or the Yantai Municipal Federation of Trade Unions to seek relevant assistance?"

Zhang Jun answered, "We have not yet made contact."

Director Wang said with a tone of admonition: "Your case may appear to be a small one, but it is very significant. If you do not hire a lawyer, you are likely to lose the lawsuit. What will happen if you lose? You should immediately contact your Shandong Provincial Federation of Trade Unions and Yantai Municipal Federation of Trade Unions and strive for their support."

Zhang Jun helplessly said, "The hearing is scheduled for tomorrow morning; there is no time left."

Looking back at the various circumstances, it was not difficult to judge that given the Fushan District Federation of Trade Unions' consistent attitude of refusal and multiple obstacles towards the Aoliwei Union, even if Zhang Jun had actively sought assistance from the Fushan District Federation of Trade Unions for the arbitration case of the six female workers, it would ultimately have been in vain and a self-inflicted humiliation. The root cause lay in the fact that during the previous strike, the group of female workers explicitly rejected the Fushan District Federation of Trade Unions' demand to resume work first and delay the establishment of a union, creating an irreconcilable divergence between the two sides. From the perspective of the local federation of trade unions, the birth of the Aoliwei Union and its proactive style of advocating for workers' rights were contrary to the path of labor-capital reconciliation they expected, thus making it impossible to obtain substantial support from beginning to end.

Given the situation, Director Wang inquired carefully about various hearing preparation tasks. After listening to Zhang Jun's introduction, he approved them and requested that Zhang Jun report the details of the hearing immediately after its conclusion for the ACFTU to conduct research and evaluation. At the end of the call, Director Wang provided the contact phone number and email address of Lin Qing (pseudonym) from the legal department of the ACFTU, suggesting that they consult and learn from him regarding subsequent rights protection matters.

On the morning of November 15, 2006, the case of Liu Meizhen and five other female workers suing Aoliwei Company for illegal termination of their labor contracts was formally heard at the Fushan District Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission in Yantai City, with Zhang Jun serving as the representative for the female workers.

84. Union cadres appeared at the hearing to testify but were pressured by the enterprise and deemed absent without leave, resulting in salary deductions.

On the morning of November 15, the day of the hearing, Wang Xinmei, Yu Huifang, and Jiang Yuqiu went to the Fushan District Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission to show support for the six female workers and appeared at the hearing to provide witness testimony.

A personnel staff member from Aoliwei Company came to deliver a message: General Manager Su had learned that the three individuals were present and required them to return to the factory immediately to work, otherwise they would be treated as absent without leave.

Wang Xinmei and others did not heed Aoliwei Company's warning. Subsequently, Aoliwei Company indeed deducted 50 yuan in wages from each of the three union cadres on the grounds of absence without leave. The three went to the Fushan District Federation of Trade Unions for assistance but ultimately received no support.

85. Confrontation at the hearing: Aoliwei Company hired a lawyer to accuse the female workers of causing trouble; all parties presented evidence and defended themselves at the hearing.

During the hearing, the company's lawyer put forward claims, accusing Liu Meizhen and others of leading a strike as unreasonable behavior rather than legally establishing a union. He claimed that the female workers' actions caused significant economic losses to the enterprise and seriously violated company rules and regulations, submitting the text of the company's rules and regulations as evidence at the hearing.

Zhang Jun, acting as the representative, responded: The enterprise has long had illegal employment issues, which were also reported by the media. The female workers repeatedly sought to establish a union to protect their own rights but were rejected by the enterprise, so they resorted to stopping work to promote the establishment of the union. Regarding the rules and regulations submitted by the enterprise, the six female workers and the witnesses appearing at the hearing unanimously stated that the enterprise had never publicized this set of rules to all employees.

Wang Xinmei and the other two appeared at the hearing to testify, corroborating the claims of the side of the six female workers. After the hearing ended, Zhang Jun immediately reported the entire process of the hearing to the All-China Federation of Trade Unions.

86. Aoliwei Company spread rumors to smear the motives of the female workers' rights protection efforts.

After the hearing ended, Aoliwei Company spread rumors among employees, claiming that the six female worker representatives had privately collected 10,000 yuan compensation from the enterprise each and that their original motive for rights protection was only to seek financial interests, not to fight for the rights of all fellow workers or establish a union. They attempted to drive a wedge between the female workers and other workers.

87. Arbitration ruled in favor of the six female workers; media published reports affirming the significance of the case.

On December 18, 2006, the Fushan District Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission in Yantai City issued Arbitration Award No. 133 (2006) Yan Fu Lao Zhong An Zi. The award supported Liu Meizhen and others' labor arbitration claims on the grounds that "the stoppage of work had legitimate reasons, the respondent could not classify it as absence without leave, and the respondent could not terminate the labor contracts with the six applicants."

On December 31, "Six O'clock This Morning" published a long-form report titled "The Union Was Born Amidst the Dismissal Storm," detailing the rights protection journey of the six female workers and the beginning and end of the birth of the Aoliwei Union. The article evaluated that this victory in the female workers' rights protection case had typical model significance.

88. The ACFTU sent a congratulatory letter to celebrate the victory of the six female workers.

Zhang Jun shared this good news with the ACFTU. At 9:00 a.m. on January 1, 2007, Director Wang from the ACFTU sent a congratulatory letter stating: "The victory of employees is joyful and worthy of congratulations; persistence leads to victory. Please convey to the six workers that regardless of where they are employed, they should organize and participate in trade unions and protect their own rights through organizations. Happy New Year!"

89. The enterprise was dissatisfied with the arbitration award and filed a lawsuit with the court.

On January 4, 2007, one day before the arbitration award would take effect, Aoliwei Company filed a civil lawsuit with the Fushan District People's Court in Yantai City, requesting to revoke the arbitration award made by the Fushan District Labor Dispute Arbitration Commission.

Zhang Jun judged that the core purpose of the enterprise filing the lawsuit was to delay the procedure. Once the litigation cycle was prolonged, by the time the first-instance and second-instance judgments were issued, the original labor contract term of the six female workers would expire. Even if they ultimately won the lawsuit, the claim to request continued performance of duties at the factory would lose practical significance.

On the morning of January 5, 2007, Zhang Jun reported the matter of Aoliwei Company filing a lawsuit to the All-China Federation of Trade Unions.

90. Zhang Jun represented the six female workers in the first-instance trial.

At 9:00 a.m. on January 30, 2007, the case was heard for the first time at the Fushan District People's Court, with Zhang Jun still serving as the litigation representative for Liu Meizhen and the other five female workers.

On January 31, 2007, Zhang Jun reported to the ACFTU in detail about the entire process of the trial on the 30th. At the same time, he truthfully stated the dire survival situation of the Aoliwei Union at that time, focusing on the relevant situations where the Fushan District Federation of Trade Unions had long been passively indifferent and inactive, hindering the union from performing its duties according to law.

Around 11:00 p.m. that night, Zhang Jun received an email sent by Lin Qing from the legal department of the ACFTU. The email affirmed Zhang Jun's defense strategy during the trial and provided further professional guidance on subsequent litigation strategies, with the main content as follows:

Zhang Jun:

Your defense grasped the key issues, and the evidence being collected is also very important. In this lawsuit, I personally believe we should mainly focus on the following issues: First, the unit's rules and regulations must be legal; unit rules that violate legal provisions are invalid. The Regulations on Rewards and Punishments for Enterprise Employees apply to state-owned enterprises and urban collective-owned enterprises, but they also have reference significance for this case. In addition, according to the Labor Law, only serious violations of enterprise labor discipline or rules and regulations can lead to termination of a labor contract; therefore, serious circumstances should be emphasized. Second, as rules and regulations of an enterprise, they must be publicized and known by all employees. Third, as you mentioned, after employees raised the demand to establish a union, especially regarding the termination of labor contracts for the six individuals leading the effort, it is no longer just a labor contract dispute but should be considered an act obstructing employees from organizing and participating in a union. The above opinions are provided for your reference.

Regarding the problems currently existing in the Aoliwei Union that you raised, I will report them to leadership in a timely manner.

ACFTU Grassroots Organization Construction Department Lin Qing

January 31, 2007