EPO Senior Management (Cabal) “Essentially Deaf to the Proposals From Staff Representatives.”

Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Not really a dialogue, just a box-ticking exercise to fake staff involvement

Egalitarian dialogue
Reference: Egalitarian dialogue

Summary: Representatives of EPO staff feel like the management of the EPO is “deaf” and uncaring; there’s hardly any meaningful progress (or none whatsoever) when it comes to truly honest dialogue with real participation

The Central Staff Committee (CSC) of the EPO is trying to make life better for Europeans and for workers of the EPO. It’s obviously in the interest of staff that the EPO endures and in order for it to endure citizens of Europe need to consent to it (rebellion comes in many forms, including more ‘radical’ forms such as ‘Brexit’). As António Campinos only joined the Office a couple of years ago (immediately parachuted in as president; at least Benoît Battistelli was associated with the Council before he became the president) we don’t suppose he cares about the institution as much as examiners who worked there for 40 years (twenty times as long as he has!) and judging by what has happened since 2018 we can see he’s willing to toss it away like a tissue — much as he did in EUIPO, outsourcing some of its workforce to India (and no, it’s likely not legal, but these people are above the law).

“It’s obviously in the interest of staff that the EPO endures and in order for it to endure citizens of Europe need to consent to it (rebellion comes in many forms, including more ‘radical’ forms such as ‘Brexit’).”“In this paper,” CSC wrote earlier this year, “we consider that VP1’s apparent good intentions came to nothing – neither in the planning nor in the legal framework of the Office, such as in Circular No. 366. The promise of improvements in respect of the target-setting exercise turned out to be mere lip service – more a manipulation exercise than a genuine interest in taking staff feedback into account.”

Here’s the full take-down, which gives some praises to Stephen Rowan (Wales/UK):

sc20004cp – 0.2.1/1.3.3

Target setting approach in DG1 for 2020 – Bottom up?


On 3 December 2019 VP1 published the DG1 operational plan for 2020 containing the criteria to be applied for setting production targets for next year in DG1.

Mr Rowan calls the so-called “bottom-up planning” an important part of the process, implicitly acknowledging that targets imposed upon staff were sometimes too ambitious in the past.

Staff Representatives in the Working Group on Performance Management (WGPM) repeatedly asked for a proper bottom-up approach to planning.

Bottom up approach

However, observing the results of the current bottom-up approach, as shown in the 2020 operational plan, raises doubts as to its success. When seeing the obscure and arbitrary way in which line managers have implemented the bottom-up process, the scattered results do not come as a surprise. An obscure correction process then apparently happened in the “discussions with the teams” (or rather their managers). The outcome was mixed with a number of other factors (stock levels, timeliness goals, recruitment, resources and SP2023). This resulted (“hey presto!”) in a compliance target of 407k and a target for excellence of 419k, surprisingly close to the target of 2018 (417k). Taking into account the steadily shrinking examiner workforce (not considering a possible further drain due to the 17 measures), it does not look much like the result of any real bottom-up exercise.

VP1’s Communiqué further claims that this target was “suggested by the bottom up plan”. The outcome is however perceived in the Directorates and Teams as more of a “kick in the bottom” than a bottom-up exercise.

Last but not least, some directors are already imposing higher targets than those derived from this pretend bottom-up exercise, citing upper managerial requirements.

Guidelines vs stated intent

Furthermore, one of the last safeguards protecting staff from arbitrarily top-down imposed-upon targets, which is that managers and staff collaboratively agree upon the contribution of individual staff members1, has disappeared in the new version of Circular No. 366 (Guidelines on Performance Management), approved in the GCC on 19 December 2019.

In the meetings of the WGPM that took place last year senior management was essentially deaf to the proposals from Staff Representatives. Mr Rowan, however, appeared to be seriously listening to the CSC’s input, and willing to implement a bottom-up approach while listening to the concerns of staff regarding planning. Nevertheless, and despite our best efforts, one of the last safeguards for staff was removed from Circular No. 366.


VP1’s apparent good intentions came to nothing – neither in the planning nor in the legal framework of the Office, such as in Circular No. 366. The promise of improvements in respect of the target-setting exercise turned out to be mere lip service – more a manipulation exercise than a genuine interest in taking staff feedback into account.

We fear the further devastating effects that this 2020 target, in combination with the New Career System, will have on staff engagement, motivation and health, building on the damage already done since 2015 when the New Career System was implemented.

We also fear the impact that the process will have on the work of the shrinking population of Formalities Officers.

The Central Staff Committee

1 Circular 366, previously valid version, section I. AIM AND SCOPE: “Performance development is the process by which managers and staff collaboratively agree upon the contribution to be made by individual staff members.”

Mr Rowan would not be the first Brit who, according to staff representatives we had heard from, showed genuine interest in listening to staff. We wrote about this before. But he probably lacks the influence and clout needed to really turn things around, so whatever goodwill may be there, it’ll get overridden by colleagues/superiors.

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

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. InteLeaks – Part XXX: Harbor Research's Pseudo-scientific 'Research' for Intel, Bizarrely Suggesting a Microsoft Partnership for a Domain Largely Controlled or Dominated by Linux

    The full document that Intel paid for and in turn used to justify cracking down on Free software (obliterating Free software-based workflows inside Intel), instead outsourcing all sorts of things to proprietary software traps of Microsoft

  2. Chromium and Chrome Are Not Free Software But an Example of Microsoft-Fashioned Openwashing Tactics

    It's time to reject Google's Web monopoly (shared with other companies but still an oligopoly); removing its Web browser would be a good start

  3. Links 23/1/2021: Chromium Pains and New Debian Maintainers

    Links for the day

  4. InteLeaks – Part XXIX: Harbor Research Did Not Produce a Study But an Elaborate Hoax for Intel, Suggesting Microsoft Partnership and Outsourcing Based on Zero Evidence and No Solid Rationale

    The pseudo-scientific ‘report’ from Harbor Research is more of the same nonsense we’ve grown accustomed to; unethical if not rogue firms are being paid to lie — or to perpetuate falsehoods which someone stands to gain from

  5. Video: The State of Communities Surrounding GNU/Linux Distributions

    A discussion about the state of volunteer efforts going into the development, maintenance (in the 'maintainership' sense) and support/advocacy of GNU/Linux distros

  6. IRC Proceedings: Friday, January 22, 2021

    IRC logs for Friday, January 22, 2021

  7. InteLeaks – Part XXVIII: Intel Served Report From Microsoft Boosters, Who Provide No Actual Evidence and No Science to Back Their Supposed 'Findings'

    Findings and recommendations from Harbor 'Research' aren't based on any scientific methods, just perceived loyalty, branding, and a bunch of unsourced quotes (from unnamed people with ridiculous job titles like a soup of buzzwords)

  8. Erosion of Communities, Ascent of Corporate-Industrial Fake Communities

    Despite the attempts to manipulate/trick developers (and sometimes users) into becoming unpaid workforce of for-profit companies, there's an exodus back to real communities, which aren't subjected to the fury of wealthy shareholders who utterly dislike or simply don't care for software freedom

  9. The Corporate 'Left' and the Open Source Pseudo 'Movement'

    President Biden may not be as bad as his predecessor, but that hardly means very much; software freedom is still threatened, along with many other things

  10. Links 22/1/2021: pfSense Plus, Endless OS Foundation, and Many Laptops With GNU/Linux

    Links for the day

  11. The Linux Foundation is Trying to Obscure Racism Using Microsoft-Inspired Tactics (Vouchers Disguised as Actual Money)

    The Linux Foundation and its PR stunts don’t help combat racism; one might argue that the Foundation is leveraging racism, which prevails in the US, to paint itself as benevolent and caring (offering immaterial things and self-serving press releases)

  12. InteLeaks – Part XXVII: 'Pulling a Nokia' on Intel (Outsourcing to Microsoft)

    The recommendation of an Intel marriage with Microsoft (even in units that deal mostly with Linux) is an insulting slap across the face of developers employed there; we take a look at recommendations made to IoTG (Intel) by a firm with Microsoft orientation

  13. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, January 21, 2021

    IRC logs for Thursday, January 21, 2021

  14. InteLeaks – Part XXVI: Harbor Research is Horrible 'Research', Lacking Actual Technical Background

    Having looked at the members of staff of Harbor Research (individually), it seems clearer now why they have an affinity for Microsoft and why they're directing Intel to liaise with Microsoft and become a prisoner of Microsoft (even in areas where Microsoft is increasingly irrelevant)

  15. Links 21/1/2021: Raspberry Pi Pico, Ubuntu 21.04 Picks GNOME 3.38, KDE Plasma 5.21 Beta

    Links for the day

  16. How a Newly Inaugurated President Biden Can Advance Software Freedom (If He Actually Wishes to Do So)

    Techrights has 'Four Suggestions' to President Biden, the 46th 'front end' of American plutocracy

  17. InteLeaks – Part XXV: Intel's Brain Drain Leads to Unusual Measures

    As the company once known as 'chipzilla' loses its relevance and dominance in the market it's reaching out to retired people, trying to get them back onboard

  18. Hey Hi (AI) is Just a Trojan Horse for Illegal Software Patents, According to EPO Management and Litigation Firms It's in Bed With

    The longtime pushers or the lobby of patent profiteers just carry on pushing for software patents, nowadays latching onto the inane and unwarranted media hype around Hey Hi (AI) — a hype wave that was co-opted by EPO management to grant unlawful patents

  19. The Central Staff Representatives (CSC) of the EPO Are Petitioning to End the Assault on EPO Staff

    The EPO, just one month after the staff went on strike, is about to receive a compelling petition to stop the assault on EPO staff

  20. InteLeaks – Part XXIV: Love for Microsoft, Not for Free Software or Whatever Replaces Microsoft

    Intel is basing its big decisions on buzzwords and firms that master buzzwords; it's sad that instead of listening to Intel's own (in-house) engineers it's relying on a bunch of clowns who push 'Clown Computing' and 'apps' and 'UX'...

  21. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, January 20, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, January 20, 2021

  22. Links 21/1/2021: Google Tightens the Screws on Chromium, VideoLAN VLC 3.0.12

    Links for the day

  23. IBM Panics and Resorts to 'Customer Retention' Tactics With Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

    IBM 'frees' RHEL but with limitations that can restrict growth of small companies (or subject them to financial barriers, originally unforeseen)

  24. Recent Techrights Articles About President Joe Biden

    Instead of writing yet more stuff about the latest US president, let's look back at what we wrote in recent weeks/months

  25. Links 20/1/2021: LibreOffice 7.1 RC2 and the RHEL Contingency

    Links for the day

  26. InteLeaks – Part XXIII: Intel Paying for Bogus 'Research' 'Insights' Which Merely Seek to Justify Outsourcing to Microsoft and Imposing Microsoft's Proprietary Software on Free Software Developers

    Intel's preference for Microsoft monopoly (an imposed/top-down decision) was seemingly certified by so-called 'consultants' and 'analysts' from the outside rather than the inside, basically manufacturing a false perception of consent after managers had already made up their minds

  27. Suppressed Facts of the Free Software Movement and Its Community of Volunteers – Part V: How FSF Secrecy Ended Up Insulting People, Alienating Trans Developers

    Having just uploaded this introductory video, we delve into the backstory or the real reason the FSF sank into somewhat of a crisis with the trans community almost half a decade ago

  28. InteLeaks – Part XXII: Bubbles and Buzzwords, No Substance at Intel's Internet of Things (IoT) Group (IOTG)

    The video above is continuation of the previous part about a document full of superficial buzzwords (not technical jargon anywhere), in effect recommending to managers that they blindly follow trends and cargo cults (such as Clown Computing) and not what’s most suitable for technical excellence

  29. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, January 19, 2021

    IRC logs for Tuesday, January 19, 2021

  30. Links 20/1/2021: WireGuard for pfSense and New US President

    Links for the day

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