THE EPO fights its own staff whilst apparently outsourcing their jobs. The media doesn't want to talk about it. That means that EPO management needs pretexts for firing people, claiming they're offenders, incompetent etc. Severance pay can be impacted by that kind of pretext. António Campinos does it perhaps more than the person who put him in charge (he has outsourcing experience from EUIPO) and this will likely worsen over time (if the endgame is complete outsourcing).

"It's far from over and it implicates even the very top position (President) of the EPO."In Koch v EPO [1, 2], which we've studied lately, there are some new developments. It's interesting not only because details are publicly available^* but because it concerns an aggrieved staff representative with disability attributed to the job at the EPO (related to the unjust dismissal). It's far from over and it implicates even the very top position (President) of the EPO. We'll probably revisit this case every now and then.

Here's the latest:

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168892510283948038

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168895856885620737

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168896759902429186

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168899256033390592

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168907490391666690

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168934902877818880

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1168939540729532416

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1169165993924583424

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1169178717584838657

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1169179509767245824

https://twitter.com/AnetteKoch/status/1169281962386886656

The ramification of this failure to deliver would be devastating to justice and, as we shall cover in later articles, we already know they use all sorts of tricks to manipulate and procrastinate the case (or send it 'back' to the EPO). They hope that complainants will simply run out of patience (and/or money).

The significance of this case will become more apparent over time. More information is becoming available and it serves to show ILO dysfunction as well as EPO misconduct. ⬆ ______ ^* The EPO's staff, including SUEPO (the union), is aware of this case. Moreover, the Tribunal's Jurisprudence is public, for instance, Judgments no. 3785, 3694 and 4131 (see triblex data base).