The $1.15 million arrears at the Ningdu Yangtze Bridge are four years behind: Fu Xiao's new Quan is still outstanding, Chen Zhui is still in the process of being settled

When will Jiangxinin be “sold” for the salary arrears of Yangtze Bridge in the village?

• The former county secretary, Fu Xiaoxiang, has been pushing the problem and the problem remains unresolved; Please ask the new county secretary Chen Yong to continue his efforts so that this problem of unpaid wages that should not be delayed is resolved as soon as possible.

@Rhai Town Government @Ninung Town People's Government @Changxi Daejiang Network @China Labor Security Journal

The Honourable Secretary Chen Zhu, Ningdu County Committee

The Honourable Secretary Chen Zhu, Ningdu County

My name is Wu Hengen, a farmer in the village of Cheseng Village, Iikawa district, Kanxi province, and a practical builder and funder of the rehabilitation of the Yang River Bridge at the town of Yanjiang Bridge, Nindu county. I have written twice before to the District Commission about the arrears of approximately $1.15 million in construction and the salaries of rural workers for four years. The former District Secretary, Fu Xiaoxiang, had urged the town government to take care of the matter, and then Zhengqin, the then Secretary of the town of Lai, had contacted me and promised to go through the procedure, but the matter was put on hold once again after his departure. Now that the County Secretary has been restructured, I would like to repeat the same matter and ask you to follow up on it.

Recently, the new party secretary, Hu Jun, met with me in the reception room on the fourth floor of the town government, accompanied by the Vice-President of Liu and the Chief of the Road Management Station.

The Hu Secretary looked at my submission carefully, asked questions and took notes. The central question he asked in person was: I did not issue an official Commission approval, why did I do the work? I replied to the truth: the work started in December 2021 and was suspended for months; In June 2022, the town government issued a change application form signed by the mayor and stamped by the town government, requesting $1.12 million in funds for the construction of the bridge, after which the town cadre informed me that I had to finish the construction and take the check-in and settlement. The construction was not an unauthorized act, but was carried forward by written confirmation and supervision of the town ' s Government.

The Secretary-General also informed me that I was not legally entitled to speak directly to the town government, nor was it obliged to receive me, and that only the winning company or its authorized person was entitled to come. I replied that I was the actual builder and the builder of the bridge, which had been in the air for four years and had been in the sweat of a peasant worker for four years.

(a) Legally, the actual builder has the right to claim the unpaid price of the work after the acceptance of the work; In a step back, even if the main qualifications and procedures need to be clarified, the wages of rural workers should not be a reason for the long-term overhang.

But one thing that I did not do was to get on the ground, but the more unease I felt: did the bridge pass for four years, with the emphasis on procedure and approval, and did it undergo a quality test for acceptance?

In accordance with the " Acceptance and Inspection Scheme for the Completion (Delivery) of Road Projects " and its implementing regulations, the pre-qualification conditions for the submission and acceptance of work clearly include the testing of the quality of work and the issuance of test opinions by the quality supervisory body under the " Road Project Quality Assessment Scheme ", which are completed with the issue of the overhauling of the test opinion; Transport may be opened only after the receipt and inspection of the work, and the notification to the competent traffic authority is filed and no objection is raised. In other words, the test is a front-line threshold for access to the vehicle and is not a “procedure” that can be followed up.

Article 40 of the Road Construction Supervisory Management Scheme also provides for an unauthorised delivery without the organization of the inspection or inspection, and for a fine of 2 per cent or less than 4 per cent of the contract price for the construction to be imposed, to be corrected and discontinued; The Road Engineering Quality Monitoring Regulations also impose fines for unqualified or unsatisfactory work and hold accountable those responsible directly responsible and others.

The Yangtze Bridge has been in operation for four years, and heavy vehicles are often coming.

If not even a legal acceptance quality test report is available, then “who signs to open traffic” is a question that must be answered. Was the project legal entity released without organizing the testing or did the detection link pass? Was it the quality oversight body that did not issue the verification opinion or was the opinion set aside? These problems, like the $1.15 million arrears, point to the same pathology: procedures can be bypassed, responsibilities can be suspended, and the consequences are for public safety.

I do not wish to confuse the security of the bridge with the lack of pay, but since the town Government is now emphasizing the process, please clarify this major gap in its own procedures. The Government cannot afford to delay payment on the basis of “procedures” while avoiding violations of its own acceptance or transit laws.

Finally, the Hu Secretary said that “in this case” would help follow up and coordinate with the authorities, but he was not sure when it would be done and asked me not to “see here” and to keep talking to him.

I am ready to work with and understand the difficulties of working at the grass-roots level. But for more than four years, I have been going through a cycle of “leadership attention-promising-resolve-satisfaction-patiously-waiting-led-the-new leaders don’t know-research-waiting-research--waiting--” The Secretary-General of Fu Xiaoxiang, in his capacity as Secretary-General, did push the matter, and indeed it did; Today, the county secretary has adjusted and the town-level “follow-up” has returned to a “uncertain date”. That's what I'm worried about most.

The reason I am writing again, Secretary Chen, is because you have made a request for the payment of your salary, and I feel that this matter should not be “suspended”.

According to public reports, you requested at the county-wide government project, the State Enterprise project, a conference on the payroll arrears of migrant workers, “a comprehensive clean-up of the wage deficit, the establishment of a desk, clear responsibilities, and time-limited sales”; In your research you have stressed the need to “resolutely prevent `new officials from ignoring old ones'”; At the conference on the promotion of a central approach to the problem of corruption and the public, you asked that the question of communications in the field of human life be “listed up, reconciled, sold” so that “the matter is heard back and the matter is settled”. I've read every word of these words.

The $1.15 million in Yen River Bridge is not just a stock that should be sold on time?

It is not you who ask for “severely to prevent” the “new officials from ignoring” the “unsure” that the main leadership of Lai village should be replaced and that the “unsure” of the day” continues to delay?

I have sent two letters and many trips to and from Ningdu, and if I have only “maintain communication” without a timetable, how does that “situation” reflect?

Secretary Chen, I don't know much about the rules of the court, but I know a simple lesson: a bridge, the town government has stamped and signed, the cadres are there to build it, the bridge is out, the money can't be kept.

Over $1.15 million, workers are paid more than $200,000, materials more than $300,000 and the winning company's guarantee is $180,000.

For more than four years, some of the children of workers have been paid for college, others have been ill and others have been afraid to return home for the rest of the year.

You have demanded “effective protection of the legal rights and interests of migrant workers”, which, for us, is the right to receive the money that we earn from sweating.

I implore you to ask the matter in your busy schedule and urge the town government to provide a clear settlement and payment schedule for the Yangjiang Bridge arrears, rather than “uncertain days”; Please also verify that the previous payment of the salaries of migrant workers by the District Transport Department has been misappropriated by more than 300,000 yuan; In the meantime, please explain to the county transport authorities and the town government whether the quality check for the inspection and inspection of the work performed by Yangtze Bridge was completed by law before the opening of traffic. Where's the test report? If not, who is responsible under the law and how are we going to complete this course?

If what Secretary Hu has called “coordination with the authorities” requires the help of the county commission to be able to function, your question is the key to breaking this cycle.

I remain convinced that the Nindu County Government will not allow a “celebrity bridge” to run under a group of migrant workers who have not been able to get their blood money for four years, or ignore a bridge that is open without a legal test.

I'm looking forward to your echo.

Helper: Wu Hengan

Tel.: 13576774863

2 November 2026

Annex: Previous Reactions Title

(1) Request the Secretary of the Jiangxiiningdu County to urge the town to pay the $1.15 million in outstanding blood and sweat money

(2) Again ask the Secretary of Jiangxi Ningdu County to help me get my sweat back

ZO: Bridge's out. Where's the test report?

The Yangtze Bridge has been in the car for four years.

For four years, heavy vehicles have come and come, and people on both sides have been moving daily.

But a basic question remains unanswered: before opening up, did the bridge undergo a mandatory acceptance quality test?

If the answer is no, or “undefined”, it is not just a question of salary arrears.

Road bridges are not built to move through.

In accordance with the " Acceptance and Inspection Scheme for the Completion (Delivery) of Road Projects " and its implementing regulations, the conditions for the pre-qualification of the acceptance and inspection are clearly defined as the quality of the works to be tested by the quality oversight body under the " Road Project Quality Assessment Scheme " and the issuance of test opinions, which have been addressed. Without this procedure, the project does not have the legal conditions for open access to the test operation.

Transport may be opened only after the receipt and inspection of the work, and after the communication has been filed with the competent traffic authority and no objection has been raised.

In other words, the test is a front-line threshold for access to the vehicle, not a “procedure” that can be followed up later.

The legal consequences are also clear.

Article 40 of the Road Construction Supervisory Management Scheme provides that failure to organize the receipt and inspection or acceptance of the goods for unauthorized delivery shall be corrected and discontinued and a fine of 2 per cent or less than 4 per cent of the contract price for the works shall be imposed.

The Regulations on the Quality Monitoring of Road Works also impose fines for unqualified or unqualified works, as well as fines of 5 to 10 per cent for units of the directly responsible supervisors and other responsible persons.

More seriously, once an accident has occurred as a result of a lack of detection or failure to accept or accept, accountability no longer remains at the administrative level.

(b) In the collapse of the commercial bridge in Shangxi, the third-party testing officer was held criminally responsible for modifying the data; Following the collapse of the Makang Red Flag Bridge in Sichuan, seven persons involved were opened for investigation on suspicion of a major security incident in the construction industry and 28 public officials were held accountable.

Back to the Yangtze Bridge.

If the bridge has been in the air for four years, and a valid acceptance quality test report cannot be obtained, then “who signed up to open the traffic” is a question that must be answered.

Is the project legal entity released without organizing the testing or did the detection link itself go through the scene?

Did the quality oversight body not issue a verification opinion or did the opinion be set aside?

These problems, like the $1.15 million arrears, point to the same pathology: procedures can be bypassed, responsibilities can be suspended, and the consequences are for public safety.

The lack of pay can slowly “coordination” and security on the bridge cannot be achieved.

Please explain whether the transport authorities of Ningdu County and the town government of Lai have completed the quality check-in and inspection of the Yangtze Bridge in accordance with the law before opening up traffic.

Where's the test report? If not, who is responsible under the law and how are we going to complete this course?

A bridge, through a car and with people on board; The test is not safe, it is a fear of life that is beyond the pay.

Social commentators, the voice of justice