11.17.20

Gemini version available ♊︎

Inside the EPO During Corona: The Hoax ‘Study’ From Campinos and Donald Trump Associate (Mercer) Debunked, EPO Management Uninterested Because Facts Are Inconvenient

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 8:59 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Today’s EPO, Europe’s second-largest institution, rejects science and facts

Campinos in Oktoberfest 2018

Summary: The Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO) highlights the degree of shamelessness, audacity and the sheer nerve EPO administration now has; when objectively refuted and presented with evidence to show that it is wrong the management responds “with mere hand-waving”

BACK in summer a document outlining the flaws in the so-called ‘study’ about the EPO‘s financial situation was preceded by this concise text:

The EPO’s financial situation has always been good, and right now it is excellent. Financial studies claiming the contrary are usually a prelude for cuts in staff benefits. The 2019 study by Mercer and Wyman is no exception.

Although the EPO’s currently makes a budget surplus of about €400m /year (20% of the budget), Mercer and Wyman predict an overall €3.8bn deficit by 2038 and endorse the President’s suggestion to add a €1.9-2bn “buffer” when closing the alleged gap.

The principal means planned to fill the alleged gap will be a reform of the annual adjustment method for the staff’s salaries and pensions. Ernst & Young has performed an analysis which fully confirmed our earlier findings. Comparing the key assumptions of the 2019 study with those of other EPO documents, Ernst & Young found that the 2019 study consistently took a more conservative approach. It is clear that the EPO has no deficit. On the contrary, under normal circumstances the EPO will continue to generate surpluses.

The EPO already has an operating surplus of about €400m/year. What is the President planning to do with the additional €2bn that he plans to save on the back of staff by changing the salary adjustment method?

As we noted earlier this week, Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos basically gamble — for personal gain — with billions of euros of money that the EPO’s isn’t even supposed to hoard. It’s a massive scandal waiting to break out (the corporate media is too full of cowards and too corruptible to make this a front page story).

The full document reads as follows:

25.05.2020
su20028cp – 0.2.1/4.2.1/0.3.2

Background to the Ernst & Young analysis

Introduction
The EPO’s financial situation has always been good, and right now it is excellent. Financial studies claiming the contrary are usually a prelude for cuts in staff benefits. The 2019 study by Mercer and Wyman is no exception. Although the EPO’s currently makes a budget surplus of about €400m /year (20% of the budget), Mercer and Wyman predict an overall €3.8bn deficit by 2038 and endorse the President’s suggestion to add a €1.9-2bn “buffer” when closing the alleged gap. The principal means planned to fill the alleged gap will be a reform of the annual adjustment method for the staff’s salaries and pensions1,2.

Deaf ears
SUEPO and the Staff Committee quickly pointed out that there are major flaws in the 2019 financial study3. Representatives of the EPO pensioners’ association did the same4. Assuming that expenditure continues to rise with no increase in income – as Mercer and Wyman did for the EPO – is unrealistic and leads to dire predictions for any organisation. But the President and the delegates in the Administrative Council clearly did not want to listen.

Heading for a conflict
We expect the Administrative Council to approve the new salary adjustment method in their upcoming meeting. If so, then the only route to challenge that decision will be legal, with the ILO-AT as the final instance. Like the Council, ILO-AT is more inclined to listen to the EPO’s administration than to EPO staff. The staff representation is not heard at all – neither the Staff Committee nor SUEPO have any standing at ILO-AT. We therefore wanted to have a professional counter-study to provide staff with authoritative support in the complaints that will inevitably follow an unfavorable decision by the Council.

What were the conditions?
Our first approach to Ernst & Young was met with hesitancy to accept the mandate. It was made clear to us that they would not comment on the EPO study other than on the basis of solid documentary evidence available in the public domain. For that, they proposed to compare the assumptions used in the 2019 study with those used in the 2016 study by Deloitte and other data sources published by the EPO. We agreed to this proposal since it increases the credibility of the analysis. But Ernst & Young also demanded very stringent use restrictions that we could not accept. After intense discussions we agreed on a

____
1 The SUEPO Salary Simulator estimates your personal financial loss. In a video we look back at the last months and explain the impact of the new method on our future salaries and pensions.
2 “The Salary Adjustment Procedure (SAP) – Timeline”, su20026cp, 19.05.2020. This paper provides an overview of what happened over the last months.
3 The Financial Study: Yet Another Hoax (sc19070cp, sc19071cp, sc19076cp and sc19081cp)
4 Letter to the AC by the EPO Pensioners’ Association, ex19151cl, 26.11.2019


compromise: copies of the document can be given to the EPO’s President, the Vice-Presidents, the Council delegates and various other political actors as well as ILO-AT, but we have no permission to publish the document on the SUEPO websites and our members are to be given protected read-on access only.

The results
Even with their very stringent approach (requiring contradictory published EPO documents or obvious methodological flaws, before commenting), Ernst & Young fully confirmed our earlier findings5. Comparing the key assumptions of the 2019 study with those of other EPO documents, Ernst & Young found that the 2019 study consistently took a more conservative approach.

Ernst & Young estimated what they called the “illustrative impact” of those highly conservative assumptions. Their main findings are the following:

- more realistic assumptions (in line with those of the RFPPS actuaries) for the contribution levels to the RFPSS and the EPOTIF reduce the alleged gap by €2.3bn
- more realistic assumptions of the return on the RFPPS and EPOTIF assets in line with other EPO documents reduce the gap by €4.0bn,
- taking into account expected future income from patents existing in 2038 (omitted in the 2019 study) reduces the alleged gap by €4.7bn,
- assuming that EPO internal fees will rise with inflation (rather than stay constant until 2038) reduces the gap by €1.6bn.
- Ernst & Young further pointed out a methodological error in the 2019 study that inflates the gap by €1.3bn.

The conclusion …
Ernst & Young warned us that the above amounts cannot simply be added up because some are interdependent. Nevertheless, it is clear that the EPO has no deficit. On the contrary, under normal circumstances the EPO will continue to generate surpluses. We note that the EPO did not communicate its alleged gap outside the EPO. The external auditors who assess the financial situation of the EPO every year see no gap needing urgent action. The same applies to the actuaries of the RFPSS. The systematic bias towards unrealistically high levels of caution in the 2019 financial study and the purely internal communication show the clear intention of the EPO to convince staff that there is a financial gap where there is none for the purpose of reducing staff benefits.

… and a question
This nevertheless leaves us with the old question: cui bono? As indicated above, the EPO already has an operating surplus of about €400m/year.

What is the President planning to do with the additional €2bn that he plans to save on the back of staff by changing the salary adjustment method?

SUEPO Central

____
5 “Selected analyses by Ernst & Young of the 2019 Financial Study of the European Patent Office”, su20025cp, 19.05.2020. SUEPO members can ask for access to the Ernst & Young analysis by sending an email to requestaccessreport@suepo.org including full name and place of employment.

Not so long afterwards SUEPO also wrote to the management — in an open letter to Campinos and his friend (whom he gave a high-paying job):

10 June 2020
su20030cl – 0.3.1

Open letter

To: President, VP4
Cc: AC delegations

Ernst & Young analysis of the 2019 Financial Study of the European Patent Office

Dear Mr Campinos,
Dear Ms Simon,

You have on various occasions criticized the analysis by Ernst & Young of the 2019 Financial Study.

More recently you seemed to focus on the indication “reliance restricted” which is written on the second page of the analysis by Ernst & Young. You seemed to imply that this indication renders the findings meaningless.

However, an indication which means in legal terms the same as “reliance restricted” can also be found in the Financial Study (CA/46/19, pages 133-134) and in the follow-up document (CA/83/19, page 235). Such an indication is indeed standard for external expert opinions. We cite:

“This report is not intended for general circulation or publication, nor is it to be reproduced, quoted or distributed for any purpose without the prior written permission of Oliver Wyman. There are no third party beneficiaries with respect to this report, and Oliver Wyman does not accept any liability to any third party (CA/46/19, page 132, §1 & CA/83/19, page 135, §1)

We resent the repeated attempts of the administration to discredit the Ernst & Young analysis. We are still waiting for serious comments on the substance of the analysis. The findings of Ernst & Young, confirming earlier observations by SUEPO, staff representation and by the pensioners’ association, raise serious questions about the actions taken by the administration during the last year in order to reform the salary adjustment method, which cannot be dismissed with mere hand-waving.

Also in order to avoid a protracted legal battle, we urge you to enter into a discussion on the substance of the matter with the aim of reaching a solution appropriate under current circumstances and which is acceptable to staff.

Sincerely yours,
SUEPO Central

In their message to staff they said: “we addressed Mr Campinos and Ms Simon (VP4) to urge them to enter into a discussion on the substance…” (echoing the above)

The staff is being told that much of the blame should be put squarely on Campinos and his friend. “Mr Campinos and Ms Simon (VP4),” they say, “have on various occasions criticized the analysis by Ernst & Young of the 2019 Financial Study on purely formal aspects.”

What do Mr Campinos and Ms Simon even know about studies? Have they ever conducted any? They’re not scientists and they don’t study anything. They’re just propagandists in formal clothing and no sense of shame.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Links 23/10/2021: FreeBSD 12.3 Beta, Wine 6.20, and NuTyX 21.10.0

    Links for the day



  2. IRC Proceedings: Friday, October 22, 2021

    IRC logs for Friday, October 22, 2021



  3. [Meme] [Teaser] Crime Express

    The series about Battistelli's "Strike Regulations" (20 parts thus far) culminates as the next station is the Balkan region



  4. Links 23/10/2021: Star Labs/StarLite, Ventoy 1.0.56

    Links for the day



  5. Gemini on Sourcehut and Further Expansion of Gemini Space

    Gemini protocol is becoming a widely adopted de facto standard for many who want to de-clutter the Internet by moving away from the World Wide Web and HTML (nowadays plagued by JavaScript, CSS, and many bloated frameworks that spy)



  6. Unlawful Regimes Even Hungary and Poland Would Envy

    There’s plenty of news reports about Polish and Hungarian heads of states violating human rights, but never can one find criticism of the EPO’s management doing the same (the mainstream avoids this subject altogether); today we examine how that area of Europe voted on the illegal "Strike Regulations" of Benoît Battistelli



  7. The EPO’s Overseer/Overseen Collusion — Part XX: The Visegrád Group

    The EPO‘s unlawful “Strike Regulations” (which helped Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos illegally crush or repress EPO staff) were supported by only one among 4 Visegrád delegates



  8. [Meme] IBM Has Paid ZDNet to Troll the Community

    Over the past few weeks ZDNet has constantly published courses with the word "master" in their headlines (we caught several examples; a few are shown above); years ago this was common, also in relation to IBM itself; clearly IBM thinks that the word is racially sensitive and offensive only when it's not IBM using the word and nowadays IBM pays ZDNet — sometimes proxying through the Linux Foundation — to relay this self-contradictory message whose objective is to shame programmers, Free software communities etc. (through guilt they can leverage more power and resort to projection tactics, sometimes outright slander which distracts)



  9. [Meme] ILO Designed to Fail: EPO Presidents Cannot be Held Accountable If ILOAT Takes Almost a Decade to Issue a Simple Ruling

    The recent ILOAT ruling (a trivial no-brainer) inadvertently reminds one of the severe weaknesses of ILOAT; what good is a system of accountability that issues rulings on decisions that are barely relevant anymore (or too late to correct)?



  10. Links 22/10/2021: Trump's AGPL Violations and Chrome 95 Released

    Links for the day



  11. [Meme] How Corporate Monopolies Demonise Critics of Their Technically and Legally Problematic 'Products'

    When the technical substance of some criticism stands (defensible based upon evidence), and is increasingly difficult to refute based on facts, make up some fictional issue — a straw man argument — and then respond to that phony issue based on no facts at all



  12. Links 22/10/2021: Global Encryption Day

    Links for the day



  13. [Meme] Speaking the Same Language

    Language inside the EPO is misleading. Francophones Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos casually misuse the word “social”.



  14. António Campinos Thinks Salary Reductions Months Before He Leaves is “Exceptional Social Gesture”

    Just as Benoît Battistelli had a profound misunderstanding of the concept of “social democracy” his mate seems to completely misunderstand what a “social gesture” is (should have asked his father)



  15. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, October 21, 2021

    IRC logs for Thursday, October 21, 2021



  16. Links 21/10/2021: MX Linux 21 and Git Contributors’ Summit in a Nutshell

    Links for the day



  17. [Meme] [Teaser] Miguel de Icaza on CEO of Microsoft GitHub

    Our ongoing series, which is very long, will shed much-needed light on GitHub and its goals (the dark side is a lot darker than people care to realise)



  18. Gemini Protocol and Gemini Space Are Not a Niche; for Techrights, Gemini Means Half a Million Page Requests a Month

    Techrights on gemini:// has become very big and we’ll soon regenerate all the pages (about 37,500 of them) to improve clarity, consistency, and general integrity



  19. 'Satellite States' of EPO Autocrats

    Today we look more closely at how Baltic states were rendered 'voting fodder' by large European states, looking to rubber-stamp new and oppressive measures which disempower the masses



  20. [Meme] Don't Mention 'Brexit' to Team UPC

    It seems perfectly clear that UPC cannot start, contrary to what the EPO‘s António Campinos told the Council last week (lying, as usual) and what the EPO insinuates in Twitter; in fact, a legal challenge to this should be almost trivial



  21. The EPO’s Overseer/Overseen Collusion — Part IXX: The Baltic States

    How unlawful EPO rules were unsurprisingly supported by Benoît Battistelli‘s friends in Baltic states; António Campinos maintained those same unlawful rules and Baltic connections, in effect liaising with offices known for their corruption (convicted officials, too; they did not have diplomatic immunity, unlike Battistelli and Campinos)



  22. Links 21/10/2021: GIMP 2.99.8 Released, Hardware Shortages, Mozilla Crisis

    Links for the day



  23. How Oppressive Governments and Web Monopolists Might Try to Discourage Adoption of Internet Protocols Like Gemini

    Popular movements and even some courageous publications have long been subverted by demonisation tactics, splits along unrelated grounds (such as controversial politics) and — failing that — technical sabotage and censorship; one must familiarise oneself with commonly-recurring themes of social control by altercation



  24. [Meme] Strike Triangulations, Reception Issues

    Financial strangulations for Benoît Battistelli‘s unlawful “Strike Regulations”? The EPO will come to regret 2013…



  25. [Meme] Is Saying “No!” to Unlawful Proposals Considered “Impolite”?

    A ‘toxic mix’ of enablers and cowards (who won’t vote negatively on EPO proposals which they know to be unlawful) can serve to show that the EPO isn’t a “social democracy” as Benoît Battistelli liked to call it; it’s just a dictatorship, currently run by the son of a person who actually fought dictatorship



  26. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, October 20, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, October 20, 2021



  27. [Meme] EPO Legal Sophistry and Double Dipping

    An imaginary EPO intercept of Administrative Council discussions in June 2013...



  28. Links 21/10/2021: PostgreSQL JDBC 42.3.0 and Maui Report

    Links for the day



  29. [Meme] [Teaser] “Judge a Person Both by His Friends and Enemies”

    Fervent supporters of Team Battistelli or Team Campinos (a dark EPO era) are showing their allegiances; WIPO and EPO have abused staff similarly over the past decade or so



  30. 'Cluster-Voting' in the European Patent Office/Organisation (When a Country With 1.9 Million Citizens Has the Same Voting Power as a Country With 83.1 Million Citizens)

    Today we examine who has been running the Finnish patent office and has moreover voted in the EPO during the ballot on unlawful "Strike Regulations"; they voted in favour of manifestly illegal rules and for 8.5 years after that (including last Wednesday) they continued to back a shady regime which undermines the EPO's mission statement


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

Recent Posts