EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

09.06.18

‘Reformist’ Campinos Seems to be Accelerating EPO Layoffs by Removing Without Warning Staff That’s Perceived as Not Loyal Enough

Posted in Europe, Law, Patents at 9:39 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Recent (on the “professional incompetence” of António Campinos): ‘Efficiency’ in Action: António Campinos is Sending Jobs Abroad, Then Gagging Critics

Rule of Law and respect for staff: more of the same

Summary: The mask of Campinos is slipping only a couple of days after people return from their summer vacation (Campinos officially started his job in July, i.e. during this vacation)

THE WOLF in charge of the EPO has just howled. There’s a purge. It’s becoming rather clear that nothing really changed at the EPO except the layoffs [1, 2]. The following letter got ‘leaked’ to us by one of its recipients around lunchtime. It was sent out some time this morning and here’s what it said:

6 September 2018
su18016hp

Rule of Law and respect for staff: more of the same

Dear SUEPO Members, dear Colleagues,

We regret to inform you that on Tuesday, 4 September 2018, an examiner working in The Hague was dismissed following a procedure before the Joint Committee on Article 52 and 531.

Our colleague has been working at the EPO for more than 10 years. His daughter started at the European School of The Hague only last week. On Monday he was still working. On Tuesday he arrived at the office only to discover that his badge had been deactivated. He became aware of his immediate dismissal when he came to work and went to the reception desk to enquire about his badge problem.

We happened to bump into our colleague as he was being escorted out by two security guards in the evening after he had been given the opportunity to collect his personal items.

The (immediate) dismissal of our colleague raises many questions:

First, in our view at present any dismissal based on Article 52 ServRegs is fundamentally flawed. On 20 July 2018 the Central Staff Committee (CSC) sent a letter to the new President addressing exactly this problem. The CSC pointed out to Mr Campinos that the Office had not met its obligation to define procedures for the implementation of Art 52 ServRegs, contrary to the requirements of Article 52(1), and stated that an ad hoc procedure, defined on a case-by-case basis (if any) cannot be (seen to be) fair to the concerned colleagues.

The CSC also appealed to him to put all pending cases on ice until fair procedures are defined2. This clearly did not happen. So, was the President ill-advised when he took the decision to dismiss the colleague?

___
1 The “Joint Committee on Articles 52 and 53″ deals in particular with “professional incompetence” (Art. 52 ServRegs).


Second, the specific circumstances of this case raise additional questions.

According to the regulations in force the notice period for our dismissed colleague is 9 (nine) months. Why has management deemed necessary to give immediate effect to the dismissal?

Why did management choose dismissal instead of e.g. classification into a lower group or downgrading? Was our colleague offered another position in the organisation before considering such a drastic measure as dismissal?

Why did management wait until the very last possible moment to inform our colleague3 and made him go through the humiliating steps described above? Is the Office going to provide adequate financial compensation for the dismissal with immediate effect, including health insurance coverage, pension contributions, payment of school fees?

The President has invited The Hague staff to an inauguration party for New Main on Friday. It should be a time to celebrate. Instead, there is now a cloud of uncertainty and fear. The SUEPO Committee is scheduled4 to have a meeting with Mr Campinos on Friday afternoon – this case will definitely come to the table.

We will keep you posted of any further developments.

Your SUEPO Committee

___
2 In the absence of clear, fair and transparent procedures, the Joint Committee simply cannot do its work as it must according to the requirements of Art. 52 ServRegs.
3 According to Article 53b, paragraph (4), the President shall take a reasoned decision within two
months of the date of receipt of the Joint Committee’s opinion.
4 Since Monday 3 September, i.e. before the dismissal.

Quite an event for SUEPO to have its likely first meeting with the President (after more than two months on the job!) over…

With an attitude like this, Battistelli’s construction site, adjacent to the old building (and still with the cranes on top of it), might also see people voluntarily falling off. This is a ‘third-world’ employment and HR set of standards. Maybe this is what Bergot and Campinos can joke about (in French of course) up in his private pub in Munich.

This letter (above) was mentioned at around midday today because IPPro Patents wrote about this ugly dismissal and SUEPO then mentioned the situation by just linking to this. No further comment; no public comment…

From the IPPro Patents article, which repeats somewhat of a smear in the headline: (“controversial ‘incompetence’ provisions,” it says; “professional incompetence” is a widely misused (and insulting) term that we mentioned many times before; it’s totally meaningless and it has even been used as an excuse for dismissing staff for developing/suffering disabilities while on the job).

The European Patent Office (EPO) has dismissed another employee under new provisions in its service regulations that allow dismissals based on “professional incompetence”.

[...]

In a message to members of the SUEPO, the union explained that the employee had been working at the EPO for more than 10 years.

The message added: “His daughter started at the European School of The Hague only last week.”

“On Monday he was still working. On Tuesday he arrived at the office only to discover that his badge had been deactivated. He became aware of his immediate dismissal when he came to work and went to the reception desk to enquire about his badge problem.”

“We happened to bump into our colleague as he was being escorted out by two security guards in the evening after he had been given the opportunity to collect his personal items.”

SUEPO called article 52 “fundamentally flawed” and noted that the EPO’s Central Staff Committee (CSC) had sent a letter on 20 July to the Campinos addressing this problem.

According to SUEPO, the CSC had pointed out to Campinos that the office “had not met its obligation to define procedures for the implementation of article 52 of the service regulations, contrary to the requirements of article 52(1), and stated that an ad hoc procedure, defined on a case-by-case basis (if any) cannot be (seen to be) fair to the concerned colleagues”.

[...]

Finally, SUEPO asked why the management of the office waited until the “very last possible moment to inform our colleague” and made him go through the “humiliating steps” described in its message.

“Is the office going to provide adequate financial compensation for the dismissal with immediate effect, including health insurance coverage, pension contributions, payment of school fees?”

IPPro Patents also published (a very short while ago) this article about UPC’s failure in Poland — a subject which Team UPC doesn’t like to talk about. We wrote about a rare admission that UPC is rotting away (this morning) and now not there’s this:

Ewa Skrzydło-Tefelska, partner at Polish firm Sołtysiński Kawecki & Szlęzak, says that Poland’s IP system is compatible with all other European states bar one aspect—Poland has refused to join Europe’s Unitary Patent system.

She says that Poland declined after initially accepting the system because “participation in the Unified Patent Court (UPC) would be detrimental for Polish small- and medium-sized enterprises”.

[...]

Skrzydło-Tefelska highlights that both Polish IP specialists and authorities are of the view that the UPC “is not an accomplished legislation. Comparing it to the EU trademark, the UPC is an empty shell, because there is practically no material patent law in it.

This is correct. We don’t believe that UPC (in any form) will ever see the light of day and any illusions that Campinos will turn things around at the EPO have just been shattered by his own actions. He’s a wolf (or lobo) as insiders pointed out this week.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Bogus Patents Which Oughtn't Have Been Granted Make Products Deliberately Worse, Reducing Innovation and Worsening Customers' Experience

    How shallow patents — or patent applications that no patent office should be accepting — turn out to be at the core of multi-billion-dollar cases/lawsuits, with potentially a billion people impacted (their products made worse to work around such questionable patents)



  2. EPO is Like a Patent Litigation (Without Actual Trial) Office, Not a Patent Examination Office

    Examination of patent applications isn't taken seriously by an office whose entire existence was supposed to be about examination; bureaucracy at the top of this office has apparently decided that the sole goal is to create more demand (i.e. lawsuits) for the litigation 'industry'



  3. Philippe Cadre From the French National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) Wants to Join António Campinos

    Yet another example of INPI's creeping influence if not 'entryism' at the EPO and this time too patent quality isn't a priority



  4. Links 22/9/2018: Mesa 18.2.1, CLIP OS, GPL Settlement in Artifex/First National Title Insurance Company

    Links for the day



  5. Links 21/9/2018: Cockpit 178, Purism 'Dongle'

    Links for the day



  6. Criticism of Unitary Patent (UPC) Agreement Doomed the UPC and Patent Trolls' Plan -- Along With the Litigation Lobby -- for Unified 'Extortion Vector'

    The Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC) was the trolls' weapon against potentially millions of European businesses; but those businesses have woken up to the fact that it was against their interests and European member states such as Spain and Poland now oppose it while Germany halts ratification



  7. It Wasn't Judges With Weapons in Their Office, It Was Benoît Battistelli Who Brought Firearms to the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The EPO scandals deepen in light of a very major scandal which has occupied the French media for a couple of months



  8. Links 20/9/2018: 2018 Linux Audio Miniconference and Blackboard's Openwashing

    Links for the day



  9. Links 19/9/2018: Chromebooks Get More DEBs, LLVM 7.0.0 Released

    Links for the day



  10. Links 18/9/2018: Qt 5.12 Alpha , MAAS 2.5.0 Beta, PostgreSQL CoC

    Links for the day



  11. Today's European Patent Office (EPO) Works for Large, Foreign Pharmaceutical Companies in Pursuit of Patents on Nature, Life, and Essential/Basic Drugs

    The never-ending insanity which is patents on DNA/genome/genetics and all sorts of basic things that are put together like a recipe in a restaurant; patents are no longer covering actual machinery that accomplishes unique tasks in complicated ways, typically assembled from scratch by humans; some supposed 'inventions' are merely born into existence by the natural splitting of organisms or conception (e.g. pregnancy)



  12. The EPO Has Quit Pretending That It Cares About Patent Quality, All It Cares About is Quantity of Lawsuits

    A new interview with Roberta Romano-Götsch, as well as the EPO's promotion of software patents alongside CIPA (Team UPC), is an indication that the EPO has ceased caring about quality and hardly even pretends to care anymore



  13. Qualcomm's Escalating Patent Wars Have Already Caused Massive Buybacks (Loss of Reserves) and Loss of Massive Clients

    Qualcomm's multi-continental patent battles are an effort to 'shock and awe' everyone into its protection racket; but the unintended effect seems to be a move further and further away from 'Qualcomm territories'



  14. Links 17/9/2018: Torvalds Takes a Break, SQLite 3.25.0 Released

    Links for the day



  15. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Helps Prevent Frivolous Software Patent Lawsuits

    PTAB with its quality-improving inter partes reviews (IPRs) is enraging patent maximalists; but by looking to work around it or weaken it they will simply reduce the confidence associated with US patents



  16. Abstract Patents (Things One Can Do With Pen and Paper, Sometimes an Abacus) Are a Waste of Money as Courts Disregard Them

    A quick roundup of patents and lawsuits at the heart of which there's little or no substance; 35 U.S.C. § 101 renders these moot



  17. “Blockchain” Hype and “FinTech”-Like Buzzwords Usher in Software Patents Everywhere, Even Where Such Patents Are Obviously Bunk

    Not only the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) embraces the "blockchain" hype; business methods and algorithms are being granted patent 'protection' (exclusivity) which would likely be disputed by the courts (if that ever reaches the courts)



  18. Qualcomm's Patent Aggression Threatens Rationality of Patent Scope in Europe and Elsewhere

    Qualcomm's dependence on patent taxes (so-called 'royalties' associated with physical devices which it doesn't even make) highlights the dangers now known; the patent thicket has grown too "thick"



  19. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Are Still Desperate to Crush PTAB in the Courts, Not Just in Congress and the Office

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) improve patent quality and are therefore a threat to those who profit from spurious feuding and litigation; they try anything they can to turn things around



  20. IAM, Watchtroll and the EPO Still Spread the Mentality of Patent Maximalism

    The misguided idea that the objective (overall) should be to grant as many monopolies as possible (to spur a lot of litigation) isn't being challenged in echo chamber 'events', set up and sponsored by think tanks and pressure groups of the litigation 'industry'



  21. Watchtroll and Other Proponents of Patent Trolls Are Trying to Change the Law Outside the Courts in Order to Bypass Patent Justice

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101) voids almost every software patent — a reality that even the most zealous patent professionals have come to grips with and their way of tackling this ‘problem’ is legislative, albeit nowhere near successful (so far)



  22. Links 16/9/2018: Windows Plays 'Nice' Again, Elisa Music Player 0.3 Beta and Latte Dock 0.8.1

    Links for the day



  23. Slamming Courts and Judges Won't Help the Patent Maximalists; It Can Only Make Things Worse

    Acorda Therapeutics sees its stock price dropping 25% after finding out that its patent portfolio isn't solid, as affirmed by the Federal Circuitn(CAFC); the only way out of this mess is a pursuit of a vastly improved patent quality, thorough patent examination which then offers legal certainty



  24. Patent Trolls Are Still Active and Microsoft is Closely Connected to Many of Them

    A roundup of patent trolls' actions in the United States; Microsoft is connected to a notably high number of these



  25. Advancements in Automobile Technology Won't be Possible With Patent Maximalism

    Advancements in the development of vehicles are being discouraged by a thicket of patents as dumb (and likely invalid) as claims on algorithms and mere shapes



  26. Battistelli “Has Deeply Hurt the Whole Patent Profession, Examiners as Well as Agents” and Also the Image of France

    A French perspective regarding Battistelli's reign at the EPO, which has not really ended but manifests itself or 'metastasises' through colleagues of Battistelli (whom he chose) and another French President (whom he also chose)



  27. António Campinos Needs to Listen to Doctors Without Borders (MSF) et al to Salvage What's Left of Public Consent for the EPO

    Groups including Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and Médecins du Monde (MdM) have attempted to explain to the EPO, with notoriously French-dominated leadership, that it’s a mistake to work for Gilead at the expense of the public; but António Campinos is just another patent maximalist



  28. The Max Planck Institute's Determination on UPC's (Unitary Patent) Demise is Only “Controversial” in the Eyes of Rabid Members of Team UPC

    Bristows keeps lying like Battistelli; that it calls a new paper "controversial" without providing any evidence of a controversy says a lot about Bristows LLP, both as a firm and the individuals who make up the firm (they would not be honest with their clients, either)



  29. Links 15/9/2018: Wine 3.16, Overwatch's GNU/Linux (Wine) 'Ban', New Fedora 28 Build, and Fedora 29 Beta Delay

    Links for the day



  30. Max Planck Institute Pours More Water on the Dying Unitary Patent (UPC)

    The Max Planck Institute gives another sobering reality check for Team UPC to chew on; there's still no sign of any progress whatsoever for the UPC because even Team UPC appears to have given up and moved on


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts