08/12/2015

Workload and effectiveness of the ILO Tribunal

In a recent document, the ILO Legal Advisor and the ILO Administrative Tribunal blame the number of complaints coming from the EPO for the Tribunal’s current workload and effectiveness problems. CA/21/15,  a report by the external auditors of the EPO, confirms problems in the internal justice system of the EPO (see in particular points 13-15 and 59-61). In response the Governing Body of the ILO requested its Director-General “to initiate without delay discussions with the European Patent Organisation … in order to identify a solution to the difficulties …” (point 33 of the above mentioned document). Staff representatives are only to be “consulted”, and that only afterwards.

ILO defines its mission and objectives as “to promote rights at work, encourage decent employment opportunities, enhance social protection and strengthen dialogue on work-related issues” (emphasis added).

SUEPO was therefore shocked and dismayed to see that the governing body of ILO (International Labour Organisation) proposed discussions with representatives of the President without involving representatives of the staff. On behalf of SUEPO and the other staff associations that rely on the Tribunal for justice, SUEPO’s lawyer, Ed Flaherty, has requested to involve staff representatives from the outset. Click here to access the letter of Mr Flaherty.

ex15447cl (pdf) published 17/11/2015
08/12/2015

Countering the propaganda

Management is alleging that some of its senior members received threats, inside and outside of the Office. A spokesperson for the EPO told WIPR that “EPO officials (senior managers but also colleagues at working level) are increasingly subject to personal attacks and undue exposure through blogs, flyers, and calls for violence”.

If there have been individual threats, surely the Office will have acted directly against the culprit (and rightly so). But we have never seen a flier or a blog calling for violence. We wonder if such allegations are not fabricated to harness sympathy among staff and outsiders, at a time when senior management has (finally) landed under intense public scrutiny for their actions. No matter how much they try to portray themselves differently, (senior) managers are not the victims: they are the perpetrators of institutional violence, particularly violence directed against those who dare to express disagreement with certain policies.

Such cheap allegations discredit EPO staff. They call into question our integrity and are an insult to our dignity of honest employee. We do not deserve that. We are committed to seeking change through peaceful protest, negotiation, transparency, and the application of checks and balances - not through threats and intimidation.

Management should commit to the same.

07/12/2015

[OHIM] Support letter from OHIM Staff Committee to the Members of the Administrative Board and the Budget Committee

The Staff Committee of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) has sent a note for the attention of the Members of the Administrative Board and the Budget Committee:

"The OHIM Staff Committee feels deeply concerned and would like to call your attention to the urgent situation at the European Patent Office (EPO) [...] three staff representatives were suspended from service in Munich with immediate effect. The EPO has initiated disciplinary proceedings against them."

"Staff committees count on monitoring bodies such as the Administrative Board to make sure that staff representatives are free to express the worries of staff without fear of punishment for doing so. In other words, staff representatives need extra protection in order to avoid possible abuses of power [...] the Administrative Council should express its concern, in uncertain terms, to the EPO management."

ex15449cp (pdf) published 26/11/2015
07/12/2015

Further Demonstration at the European Patent Office

The next demonstration will take place on Thursday 10 December, starting from the Pschorrhöfe building at 12h. The demonstrators will march peacefully to the local Palace of Justice.

With these demonstrations staff protests against the persistent attacks on its staff representatives, culminating in the suspension of and disciplinary procedures against 3 Union officials in Munich.

06/12/2015

[Pierre-Yves Le Borgn'] Follow-up on Mr le Borgn's initiatives

French MP Pierre-Yves le Borgn' represents French nationals living in Germany and Austria (among other countries). Here is an up-to-date course of events regarding his intiatives:

  • In a previous blog post (18 November 2015, translations available in English, German and Dutch), Mr Le Borgn' indicated that he sent a letter (translations in English, German and Dutch) to Mr Macron.
  • In another previous blog post (20 November 2015), Mr Le Borgn' indicated that he received a reply from Mr Battistelli (translations in English, German and Dutch).
  • In a recent blog post (30 November 2015), Mr Le Borgn' reproduced the position (translations in English, German and Dutch)of SUEPO on the reply from Mr Battistelli in a letter dated 30 November 2015.
  • On 2 December, Mr Le Borgn published in his latest EPO-related blog post a letter (tranlations in English and German) dated 30 November 2015 received from a group of "examinateurs exaspérés".

ex15441cp (pdf) published 30/11/2015
ex15441cpe (pdf) published 30/11/2015
ex15441cpg (pdf) published 30/10/2015
ex15441cpnl (pdf) published 30/11/2015
06/12/2015

EPO press coverage

The european press continues its covering of the appaling social situation at EPO :

01/12/2015

[El Confidencial] Suicidios, espionaje, nepotismo. La Oficina Europea de Patentes es un polvorín

Translated title: Suicides, espionage, nepotism... The European Patent Office is a powder keg

El Confidencial, a highly praised spanish media reports on the deteriorated social situation at European Patent Office and in particular about its authoritarian drift:

Florian Mueller, a world authority on the granting of patents, says: “The most recent information we’re getting describes a situation that would be inconceivable anywhere in the civilized world, but then the European Patent Organization, quite simply, is not a part of the civilized world”. It has even been said that the Office today is the last dictatorship on European soil.

So what is Mueller, a German, talking about? Nothing more and nothing less than the fact that an atmosphere of panic at work and psychological terror has been created among many of the 7,000 or so employees of the European Patent Office (EPO).

ex15436cpe (pdf) published 26/11/2015
ex15436cpf (pdf) published 26/11/2015
ex15436cpg (pdf) published 26/11/2015
ex15436cpnl (pdf) published 26/11/2015
01/12/2015

[USB] Labour dispute at European Patent Office

The Union Syndicale Brussels (USB) is the biggest trade union in the European Public Service. Its members are drawn from all the European institutions and organisations. It has sections for the European Commission, the EU Council, the European Parliament, Eurocontrol etc. Founded in 1973, it was set up to defend the unique status of officials of the European Communities.

Union Syndicale Brussels has published a message of solidarity for our three suspended colleagues and initiated the distribution of this message to the entire staff of the above European institutions and organisations - more than 50,000 employees.

30/11/2015

Comments on letter of President Battistelli to Pierre-Yves Le Borgn' dated 20.11.2015

In an apparent effort to put a positive “spin” on his position, Mr Battistelli’s letter (translation in English) can at best be described as being economical with the truth. In an effort to put the record straight, we establish the facts that will clearly refute a mere selection of his more amazing statements.

Part 1: Allegations of harassment amongst staff representatives

The second paragraph is a key part of the letter, wherein it mentions six resignations from the staff representation. One particular case in The Hague is attributed to a “campaign of harassment”. It is later implied that all elected staff representatives who either were not SUEPO members or who express opinions contrary to the union have left the staff representation. In the context of a response to Mr Le Borgn’s reaction to the news of the suspension of three staff representatives in Munich, the President seems to suggest that these “facts” alone justify all the suspensions.

The truth is:

  1. Of the three suspended staff representatives, two are accused of an alleged misconduct that is totally unrelated either to resignations in the staff representation, or to harassment of staff representatives.
    Evidence: first pages of the reports setting out the reasons for the disciplinary procedures against two of the three suspended colleagues.
  2. The initial accusation of harassment raised against the third staff representative who has been suspended has not been maintained in the disciplinary procedure. The same elected official is now accused of allegedly harassing other colleagues, this time in Munich. Yet none of these purportedly “harassed” colleagues has actually filed an individual complaint.
    Evidence: first page of the report setting out the reasons for the disciplinary procedures against the third suspended colleague
  3. Two colleagues elected since the introduction of Social Democracy to the local staff committee in Munich have resigned. These colleagues were both “SUEPO candidates” who resigned primarily or exclusively because they received threatening letters sent by the President and/or Ms Bergot. Moreover, two other colleagues in Munich who were not “SUEPO candidates” are still active, i.e. they have not resigned. There is a similar situation in The Hague. In other words, there is no simple one-to-one correlation between being “SUEPO candidates” or not and these resignations, as is suggested by Mr Battistelli.
    Evidence:  The colleagues who resigned from the Staff Representation are all in a position to confirm this. 
  4. It is important to note that apparently none of the alleged victims has filed an individual complaint. The investigation into the alleged harassment by one colleague which was later expanded to embrace other staff representatives seems to be solely based upon a complaint filed by Ms Bergot, Principal Director HR. Even if acting on the harassed party’s behalf, Ms Bergot has a rather blatant conflict of interest.
    Evidence: first page of the report of Control Risks on the third colleague.

Conclusions:

  1. The second paragraph of Mr Battistelli’s letter grossly misrepresents the basic facts and may lead the reader to draw the wrong conclusions.
  2. The accusations against all three suspended staff representatives are both vexatious and absurd:
Note that IPKat blog, although often humorous, is a highly respected and influential, independent IP blog, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPKat

Part 2: Allegations against the suspended member of the Boards of Appeal

Paragraph 3 on the second page simply repeats allegations against the suspended Boards of Appeal member that were apparently raised by the Investigative Unit. Amongst these are “storing weapons and Nazi propaganda”.

Even should such allegations eventually be found to be true, then the President of the EPO’s action publicly commenting on a pending procedure would represent:
(a) a serious breach of confidentiality,
(b) an offense against the presumption of innocence, 
(c) an unacceptable interference with an on-going procedure,
(d) and a potential case of him defaming our suspended colleague

The President should, however, have known that the Enlarged Board of Appeal had already dismissed the case because the accusations were too generic and unsupported by a detailed correlation to any evidence available that would allow the accused to defend himself adequately and have allowed the EBoA to assess the case in accordance with proper judicial standards.
Evidence: Decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of 17 Sept. 2015 (the reasoning of which was only published recently), pages 24, 25 and 33.

Conclusions:

  1. Under such circumstances, it is incomprehensible that the President of the EPO continues to publicly accuse the suspended Board member in such an outrageous and misleading manner.
  2. As always, the comments of IPKat on this topic are worth reading:
    http://ipkitten.blogspot.de/2015/11/why-enlarged-board-rejected-ac-in.html

Part 3:  Remaining parts of the letter

The remaining parts of the letter are of a comparable level. What is particularly striking is the contrast between the noble principles and intentions expressed by Mr Battistelli and the reality.

The question arises as to why Mr Battistelli insists on making statements that are so readily refuted: whether it proves to be deliberate or just defiant, only time will tell.
Show more

30/11/2015

Actions continue at the European Patent Office

The next demonstrations will take place on:

  • Tuesday 01 December, starting at 12:00,  In front of the Dutch Ministry of Economy in The Hague.
  • Friday 04 December, starting at 12.30h in front of the Isar building in Munich.

With these demonstrations staff protests against the persistent attacks on its staff representatives, culminating in the suspension of and disciplinary procedures against 3 Union officials in Munich.