The suspension of three staff representatives in Munich and the attacks on two more in The Hague, attracted quite some attention, most of it rather critical of the EPO. The events were covered by:Pierre-Yves Le Borgn',FOSS Patents,IPKat (here and here),Merkur Online,NRC (translations inEnglish,French andGerman),World Intellectual Property Review

Further EPO related news can be found on IPKat.

IPKat comments on a report published by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) on 15 October 2015 and titled"Workload and Effectiveness of the Tribunal" (with French translation):

"The International Labour Organisation (ILO) is raising serious concerns about the situation at the EPO, where labour or workers' rights are being gradually abolished and the number of complaints has gone through the roof."

and paragraph 18 explicitly states that:

"Member organizations expressed serious concern about the volume of complaints against the EPO, and most importantly about the fact that problems around the "litigation culture" and social dialogue in that organization are not conjunctural but are most likely to persist unabated for many years. The general sense is that, based on available information, the current situation is not sustainable and that measures such as the increase of the number of judges or the number of sessions will not have a lasting effect on, much less resolve, the current flow of complaints filed by EPO officials. While noting the explanations of EPO administration officials about their genuine efforts to improve the situation, member organizations agreed that this was a governance problem of broader dimensions which called for urgent action in the interest of preserving the Tribunal's operation."

SUEPO had previously submitted its views on the situation in the answer to the ILO-questionnaire.

Mr Battistelli has issued on 16 October 2015 an internal Communiqué, entitled "Defending our values", about an "unprecedented disciplinary case". The day before, the Administrative Council did not follow the proposal of Mr Battistelli, which was in flagrant breach of Art. 23(1) EPC, to fire the suspended DG3 colleague. SUEPO, having no insight into the details of the disciplinary case, will not attempt to comment on the merits but would like to point out that:

1. everybody is to be considered innocent until proven guilty, and
2. pending disciplinary procedures are confidential, primarily to protect the personconcerned.

The procedure is still pending since the matter has been referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal, which has yet to give its opinion.The accusations openly made by Mr Battistelli in his Communiqué of 16 October are thus wholly inappropriate. More comments can be found in this publication.

Translations inFrench,German andDutch are available.

In the report of the 145th meeting of the Administrative Council (AC), the Council announced its decision to initiate a review of the social situation at the European Patent Offce and to continue the exercise aiming at union recognition talks.

In a letter to Mr Kongstad, Chairman of the AC, and Mr Battistelli, President of the Office, SUEPO reminds that the initial talks were interrupted because, at precisely the same time as the talks were starting, the Office Administration considered it appropriate to initiate an investigation with the help of Control Risks against staff representatives and/or union executives.The closure of this investigation and any other investigation or disciplinary procedure targeting staff representatives and/or union officials - without prejudice to the accused - is a condition sine qua non for recommencing the talks.

A copy of the letter can be found here.

Bayerischer Rundfunk comments on the project titled "Closer contacts with major applicants" involving Microsoft, Canon & Co designed to "foster a better esprit de service, not least to ensure that [the EPO] do[es] not lose workload market share to other major offices". The article describes the project as a "preferential treatment".

Translations inEnglish andFrench are available by scrolling through the document.

JUVEreports on the decision of the Administrative Council (AC) to refer the disciplinary case of the suspended member of the Boards of Appeal (BoA) to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBoA).The AC did not follow the proposal of Mr Battistelli, which was in flagrant breach of Art. 23(1) EPC, to fire the suspended member.

The social conflict has escalated further with the investigation in relation to a complaint filed with the Investigative Unit (IU) by Elodie Bergot, Principal Director Human Resources, against staff representatives and accusing Elizabeth Hardon, Munich Chair of SUEPO and the Local Staff Committee.

Heise Online (archive) comments on the project titled "Closer contacts with major applicants" designedto "foster a better esprit de service, not least to ensure that [the EPO] do not lose workload market share to other major offices" and so that "[i]tcan be explored as to what the EPO can do for them and vice versa".

Canon, Philips, Microsoft, Qualcomm, BASF, Bayer, Samsung, Huawei, Siemens, Ericsson and Fujitsu are the companies which are part of the project. Most of them are not European.

Translations in English andFrenchare available by scrolling through the document.

WIPR reports on the demonstration of 900 members of EPO staff in front of the ISAR building on 14 October:"Elizabeth Hardon Hardon is defending herself against claims that she "orchestrated and promoted" a harassment campaign against a member of staff at the EPO's The Hague office [...] she has been on the receiving end of institutional harassment from EPO management"

"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."

IPKat comments on the Communiqué of the European Patent Organisation after the 145th meeting of the Administrative Council:

"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.