The reform of sick leave and invalidity constitutes another severe attack on both dignity and fundamental rights of EPO staff.

Explanations can be found in the publication available here.

After the first tripartite (AC/Office/Unions) meeting on 22 April where all parties expressed a cautious optimism that such engagement should lead to an improved social climate, a special Working Group (WG) was established to look into the particular issue of formal union recognition.

A report on the meeting can be found here.

In its 119th session the Tribunal delivered a total of 77 judgments, of which 24 cases involving the EPO. Of the 24 EPO cases, only one case was won by the complainant. The remaining 23 cases were dismissed, 13 summarily.

This paper discusses the cases that have broader relevance and the overall implications.

On 30 April 2015 some 800 colleagues marched from the PschorrHöfe complex to the Dutch consulate in Munich.The demonstration was covered by FOSS Patents:

"It's unfortunately true that the EPO, claiming immunity, behaves like an enclave that doesn't have to respect European/EU human rights and labor law standards." [...] "While I don't think Mr Battistelli's resignation would in and of itself represent a solution, I also don't feel he's unreplaceable. The Administrative Council should have decided to take the mediation route anyway and should simply have accepted his resignation.

FOSS Patents reports on the protests which continue at the EPO despite the promise of union recognition.The article also cites a SUEPO flyer titled A Brave New EPO explaining some key underlying issues behindthe governance crisis at the EPO:

"The stated reasons for certain reform measures are based on the nonsensical notion that the EPO "competes" with the USPTO, JPO, SIPO and other non-European patent offices. If it competes with anyone, it's with national patent offices, but national patent systems control the EPO through the Administrative Council and milk it (through high renewal fees that have an almost 100% gross margin for national patent systems)."

"Two-thirds of the applications filed at the EPO are not of European origin and thus are more likely to hinder European industry than benefit it. A flood of badly examined patents could affect in particular the small and medium-sized enterprises that cannot afford expensive litigation."

AFTER having pushed through a career reform that increased the salaries for newly recruited managers and stalls the careers of almost everybody else,
AFTER having accepted the next health reform that further weakens the position of staff who are sick or invalid, and
AFTER having confirmed the Council's "clear will to continue the policy of reforms to the benefit of users" (sic),

Mr Kongstad and Mr Battistelli called for a renewed social dialogue. Mr Kongstad and Battistelli "consider in particular that the formal recognition of the trade unions within the EPO’s legal framework could create the conditions to re-launch the process and to overcome some longstanding issues."

SUEPO obviously applauds the initiative to recognise a Union that represents half of the personnel of the EPO. This was indeed long overdue. However, we fail to see how Union recognition could solve any of the more urgent outstanding problems.

The next demonstration targets the Dutch consulate (see SUEPO flyer).

IPKat reacts to misleading information provided by the European Commission and the European Patent Office on the Unitary Patent Package.In particular, the procedure is more complex than advertised, the costs won't be lower in practice and European SME's won't benefit from the new system:"Any benefits of the system apply equally to non-European companies, but the disadvantages will disproportionately affect European ones, particularly the potential rise in third party patent rights that they have to consider, and especially in the countries where fewer European patents are currently validated."

In a later post, IPKat simulates an interview between a patent attorney and his client trying to understand whether he/she should opt for the Unitary Patent.

El Pais, one of the reference newspapers in Spain, published an article on the social conflict at the EPO due to the "dictatorial attitudes" of President Battistelli, abuse of the judicial immunity and lack of proper consultation on the reforms.

Translations in English, French and German are available by scrolling through the document.

Back in February 2015, the Danish website, Ingeniøren (printable version), commented on the protests at the European Patent Office and the lack of independence of the Boards of Appeals:

"the highly educated specialists of the EPO have been so frustrated about the consistent erosion of their ability to do a good job that they have been out demonstrating in Munich, where the EPO has its headquarters. The most recent demonstrations ended at the Danish consulate in Munich" [...] "There will no longer be even one independent instance for a company that fails to get its European application approved. That amounts to serious prejudicing of rights!"

"It is now being suggested quite seriously in professional patent advisory circles that clients should be advised to avoid the EPO (and thus the unitary patent) entirely and apply nationally, the way things were done long ago, before 1978."

A translation in English is available by scrolling through the document.

Mr Battistelli and Mr Kongstad called for a renewed social dialogue and invited Union officials to a "kick-off meeting" on 22 April 2015.

A report on the meeting can be found here.