"the protestors were denied the right to protest on the EPO's office grounds by management. SUEPO said the EPO's decision was "utterly irresponsible" [...] staff and police ended up on the road in close proximity to moving traffic. [...] It says a lot about how much the current top management hates its staff union that it allows Greenpeace to demonstrate on office grounds, but not SUEPO."
"The Administrative Council of the European Patent Office (EPO) has rejected the proposal from the President, Benoit Battistelli, (reported here) which would have seen them bypass the Enlarged Board and proceed directly to dismissal of a Board of Appeal member, contrary to Article 23 EPC. Instead, the matter has been formally referred to the Enlarged Board with a request that it make a proposal for dismissal." The decision was also commented by WIPR.
"Merpel initially thought she detected, in the section dealing with the "social situation" a recognition by the AC that the unrest and low morale in the Office need to be dealt with, in spite of repeated denials from Mr Battistelli.However, launching a social study "in close co-operation with the President" deprives that study of any credibility. A report which is vetted, contributed to, and possibly edited by the President will be a whitewash."
The comments note that the Communiqué is silent on the ongoing investigation of staff representatives, and especially the accusations against Elizabeth Hardon, Chair of SUEPO Munich and the Local Staff Committee.In addition to that, "Elizabeth Hardon, vice-chair of SUEPO has asked AC chair Jesper Kongstad to allow an independent body to assess her claim that she has been on the receiving end of institutional harassment by EPO management." "She demanded a 'misconduct investigation into the institutional harassment against [her] and other EPO staff representatives... and that the EPO be instructed immediately to cease and desist from such illegal and irregular misconduct".
"Headquartering the Boards in a different country opens up the enthralling possibility of firing Board members, possibly even without the distasteful necessity of referring such decisions to the Enlarged Board. As Mr Battistelli has discovered in the last year, even getting one Board member fired is not as easy as one might think. The European Patent Convention and due process keep getting in the way."
Some commentsmention that in the context of the disciplinary procedure against a member of the Board of Appeal, Mr Battistelli is said to be pressing the delegations to overule a decision by the Enlarged of Board of Appeal which he considers wrong.During the coming meeting of the Administrative Council (13/14 October) staff of the European Patent Office will demonstrate in The Netherlands and Germany.In The Netherlands EPO staff will demonstrate on Tuesday 13 October at 12.00h in front of the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs in The Hague (Parnassusplein 5, next to the Central Station).
We request an urgent labour inspection of the EPO by the Dutch Arbeidsinpectie in conformity with the Article 20 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities (PPI) of the EPOrg.
In Germany EPO staff will demonstrate on Wednesday 14 October at 13.00h in front of the EPO Isar building in Munich (Bob-van-Benthem-Platz 1).
According to SUEPO, the EPO has been transformed into a totalitarian state where the rights of staff and of those who defend the rights of staff – or simply adhere to common sense – are being crushed to the benefit of a few, mainly French, who are making rocket careers.The EPO is a civil service organisation and not a self-service organisation.
We wish to remind the Council delegates and the governments of the Member States that they are responsible for the European Patent Organisation, its mission and its staff.
SUEPO was sorely tempted to rebut the slanderous allegations of VP4 and VP5, but the public ridicule to which they are subjected speaks volumes on our behalf, see for instance the comments on IPKat.
If anyone has doubts about the legality of SUEPO's actions or about the sincerity of the EPO's offer of impartial legal assistance, the SUEPO committee will be happy to answer questions. At this moment, it will suffice to say that SUEPO applauds VP4 and VP5 for finally grasping the notion of the applicability of "basic fundamental rights" and "general principles of law", and look forward to further progress reports about their seemingly ongoing study of fundamental legal doctrines.