01.30.18
Gemini version available ♊︎ILO Has Once Again Let Down Labour at the EPO by Siding With Union Busters
So much for Labour Org…
Summary: ILO continues to protect Battistelli as the ILOAT fails to see a pretty blatant union-busting campaign for what it really is
THE EPO has already come under several legal actions in Dutch courts. It sometimes even refused to obey court orders from Dutch judges whilst attacking Dutch nationals like Elizabeth Hardon (an EPO staff representative). It was around that time that the EPO funneled money to better control (mislead/silence/bribe) Dutch media with FTI Consulting's outside help. Battistelli, in his typical fashion, sought to derail journalism (nowadays the EPO does the same to academia). He tried hard; he just flings EPO budget at whatever official he needs a vote from, so why not publications too?
FNV, which we mentioned here before [1, 2] (it’s mentioned a lot in Dutch articles), is in the news again [1, 2, 3, 4]. These articles are all in Dutch and they might be translated by SUEPO some time soon (into English and maybe French). An automated translation of the original from FNV says this: “The FNV called Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Minister of Social Affairs and Employment Wouter Koolmees in a letter to intervene at the European Patent Office (EPO). EPO again violates Dutch law.”
This comes in a timely fashion because a couple of hours ago an anonymous blogger said that “ILO Administrative Tribunal dismisses complaints against EPO president,” alluding specifically Hardon’s case and then moving on to a few others:
The Administrative Tribunal of the ILO (ILOAT), which decided a series of cases concerning the EPO in its 125th session last week, dismissed a complaint of the former SUEPO trade union chairman Elizabeth Hardon against her downgrading by EPO president Benoit Battistelli.
[...]
Another case the ILOAT decided last week concerned Aurélien Pétiaud, a long-time EPO employee and staff representative. He had been ordered to participate in sessions of the Internal Appeals Committee (IAC). ‘On 25 March 2014 the complainant informed the Chairperson of the IAC that he would not participate in the IAC session held that day as he was on strike. He subsequently informed the Chairperson of the IAC that he would not be able to attend the June and July sessions of the IAC because of his existing workload and the limited support received from the secretariat.’
We knew that ILOAT would rule on some staff representation cases, but we did not imagine that ILO would show such incredible weakness and cowardice. A sad day (or week) for the EPO… █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA