Gemini version available ♊︎

As Work/EPO Invalidity Appeals Rejected, More Reasons Emerge to Worry About the Campinos Regime

Posted in Europe, Patents at 11:48 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Blog of Battistelli

Summary: Weeks after Campinos cuts off communication with the union he’s reported to have successfully influenced a decision on European software patents and now he meddles in internal tribunals as well (to the detriment of vulnerable staff, as usual — a Battistelli ‘hobby’)

The Central Staff Committee (CSC) of the EPO is looking after the health of the weakest or most vulnerable among EPO staff. This is what the union too has been doing, in turn rendering some of its leaders more vulnerable (subject or target of attacks from EPO management). SUEPO intends to fight on that front as well. Today we reproduce a document leaked to us by a recipient, as it clearly shows that Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos have become almost synonymous. Might as well call them Benoît Campinos and António Battistelli. Remember that the EPO has given many members of staff chronic health conditions; for starters, even though media never bothered covering this, 40% of EPO workers had Upper Limb Disorder (ULD) some years ago. It’s difficult if not impossible (or incredibly painful) to work that way, and as workload increases so will that pain. Who cares about labour regulations, right? With a pandemic, anything goes. Any violation that is…

“Remember that the EPO has given many members of staff chronic health conditions”We’ve decided to reproduce the item below as-is, though it relates to a document published some months ago (EPO Staff Representatation commented on the Appeals Committee).

Zentraler Personalausschuss
Central Staff Committee
Le Comité Central du Personnel

Munich, 19.03.2021
sc21036cp 0.2.1/5.2

Internal appeals against the New Career System and the Abolition of the Invalidity Lump Sum

At the beginning of February, Mr Campinos issued his decisions on appeals against two majors reforms of his predecessor: the New Career System and the Abolition of the Invalidity Lump Sum. Mr Campinos ignored the solid minority opinion in the first case and even refused to follow the unanimous opinion in the second case. The colleagues affected will have to challenge the decisions before ILOAT.

New Career System

The 2015 new career system
In 2015, the EPO introduced a new career system abolishing any seniority recognition, solely based on competition between staff and still unique among International Organisations. The change of working conditions was radical. Each year, around 40% of staff do not get any pensionable reward. Several hundreds of EPO staff filed appeals against the general decision CA/D 10/14, the implementing decisions transposing them into the new salary scale and the abolition of automatic step advancement.

The opinion of the Appeals Committee
The Appeals Committee (ApC) in its enlarged composition considered in its majority opinion that some of the appeals were irreceivable and the others were unfounded. However, the majority did acknowledge that the Office, when implementing the reform, could have done “more considerate management” and “a better communication exercise”. Regrettably, the majority also considered that the President does not have the requisite legislative power to make promises to staff regarding their career progression as it is a decision which is within the remit of the Administrative Council, although the President has the power to decide discretionarily, year after year, on the career progression of each of “his” appointees.

Mr Campinos decision
In his decision, Mr Campinos simply follows the majority opinion without commenting on it. One can therefore infer that Mr Campinos fully supports the view that any promise he makes is by definition non-binding on him and would actually be subject to a decision by the Council. This can therefore be taken to apply also to any promise Mr Campinos can make on the application of the positive outcome of appeals or judgments to all staff.

The ApC opinion came also with a strong minority opinion which Mr Campinos ignored in his decision. This attitude won’t improve the image of the Office before the Tribunal.

Next steps
EPO staff will need to file individual complaints in order to safeguard their rights. The matter will then have to be dealt by the Tribunal with the clear evidence after several years that career perspectives were either slowed down or blocked for a majority of EPO staff.

Abolition of the Invalidity Lump Sum

The 2015 sick leave and invalidity reform
The EPO regulations on sick leave and invalidity underwent radical changes in 2015. The changes described in CA/14/15 rev 1. and the Administrative Council decision CA/D 2/15 caused considerable unrest1 among staff. Prior to the reform, employment at the EPO included participation in a compulsory death and invalidity insurance scheme, for which premiums were paid from the salaries. This insurance scheme comprised a lump sum to be paid out in the event of invalidity. The lump sum served to cover loss of income due to invalidity. This was particularly important for staff with dependants. Under the new regulations, not only are the emoluments lowered, but also the lump sum was abolished altogether, without replacement or alternative. This put in difficult situation employees who are now much older and cannot hope to get a similar insurance on the private market at rates they can afford. Staff members may have paid 25 years or more for it, only to see it disappear at a time when they might need it.

The opinion of the Appeals Committee
Five years later, the Appeals Committee (ApC) unanimously concluded that, by abolishing the permanent invalidity lump sum without adopting any transitional measures to allow for a smooth transition to the new system, the Office breached its duty of care. More specifically:

• the Office did not provide for a transitional period during which it would assist its employees wishing to contract a private insurance covering the risk of invalidity.
• the Office did not consider any transitional measures regarding the situation of employees who already suffered from an adverse transitional medical condition at the time of the reform and whose permanent invalidity would have been established shortly after the reform.

In the light of the above, the Appeals Committee recommended that the President avail himself of the power accorded to him by virtue of Article 75 of CA/D 2/15 and take appropriate transitional measures.

Mr Campinos decision
In his decision, Mr Campinos by delegation of authority to Ms Simon (VP4), does not acknowledge the breach of duty of care and line up arguments demonstrating bad faith.

First, Mr Campinos pretends that “it is not practicable for the Office to identify which staff members would fall within the categories of staff to whom the ApC has indicated that transitional measures should apply”.
However, the ApC opinion is clear: they should be applied to all staff who were hired by the EPO before 1 April 2015 and to all staff who had medical conditions making them invalid shortly after the reform.

1 “Another severe attack on both dignity and fundamental rights of EPO staff” SUEPO paper (su15203cp) of

Second, Mr Campinos argues that “it is not possible to obtain insurance with the same coverage as the former invalidity lump sum at a comparable cost. This issue is compounded by the passage of over 5 years (and changes of circumstances) between the abolishment of the invalidity lump sum and the present date”. Mr Campinos neither mentions nor substantiates the changes in circumstances. The time elapsed since the filing of the appeals is by far the most disingenuous argument. The Office bears the responsibility for the backlog of the ApC due to its wrong composition, which the Tribunal ruled on in Judgments 3694 and 3785. Furthermore, in the present case, the Employment Law Department of the Office took two years to send its position to the ApC and Mr Campinos took nine2 months to consider the ApC opinion and make a decision. Mr Campinos is actually making staff pay for the delay caused only by the Office itself.

Next steps
Once again, this decision forces individual staff members to challenge the case before the Tribunal, including those suffering from progressive degenerative diseases that will undoubtedly render them invalid. Such staff members are often not fit enough to defend themselves and therefore need help. Such need for action and the Office’s breach of duty of care is difficult to reconcile with the Office claiming that we are “Strong Together”. In recent meetings, Mr Campinos said that he would be ready to provide help to staff members in case of hardship. But EPO staff do not need or want charity. EPO staff needs clarity and legitimately expects the Office to stick to its rules and acknowledge its mistakes.


The days when Mr Campinos preferred to reduce litigation through settlement discussions seem now to be over. By selectively following ApC opinions to confirm two major negative reforms against EPO staff, Mr Campinos reveals one facet of his mandate: to protect and pursue the political legacy of his predecessor.

The Central Staff Committee

2 Two months should normally have been the limit.

Any further commentary would likely just detract. Readers can conclude (for themselves) how bad things have become at the EPO. Nothing has truly improved since 2018. The media has gotten a lot quieter, but that hardly helps anybody.

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. Jim Zemlin's Wife is Funded by Puppies (Microsoft)

    Jim Zemlin — like his wife — is bagging millions from Microsoft, but that’s clearly a conflict of interest for the Linux Foundation

  2. Links 18/05/2022: More Defections From WordPress to Gemini

    Links for the day

  3. Links 18/05/2022: PikaScript and cURL's Annual User Survey

    Links for the day

  4. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, May 17, 2022

    IRC logs for Tuesday, May 17, 2022

  5. Phoronix: Microsoft and Phoronix Sponsor (and Close Microsoft Partner) AMD All Over the Place

    When you’re taking massive 'gifts' from AMD (and also some from Microsoft) maybe it’s not surprising that editorial decisions change somewhat…

  6. EPO Has No F-ing Oversight

    Earlier today SUEPO mentioned this new article demonstrating that EPO President António Campinos can very obviously and blatantly violate the Code of Conduct of the Office without facing any consequences; there are translations too, so the report is now available in four languages

  7. [Meme] Linux-Rejecting Foundation

    The Linux Foundation never really leads by example; by default, it uses proprietary software

  8. Linux Foundation Almost Never uses Open Source

    The Linux Foundation uses proprietary software (look where they hire and take money from) and be sure they're probably not even aware of it

  9. Links 17/05/2022: Many More Games on GNU/Linux, YaST Development Report

    Links for the day

  10. Links 17/05/2022: Rocky Linux 8.6 and Budgie Desktop in Fedora

    Links for the day

  11. Patent Examiners Rising Up Against EPO Abuse

    Unhappy with the law-breaking autocracy (the EPO‘s management breaks the law as a matter of routine), fast-deteriorating working conditions and rapidly-decreasing quality of work (or lack of compliance with the law), workers have escalated further, topping off strikes and industrial actions with a large-scale petition

  12. [Meme] What Managers (Really) Mean by Acting Professionally

    The myth of 'professionalism' needs to die along with the façade of conformity as prerequisite for employment (Linus Torvalds can work just fine in a bathrobe in his own home)

  13. Internal Poll: 93% of European Patent Office (EPO) Workers Are Unhappy With the EPO

    On top of strike/s and industrial action/s there are now also petitions; at the EPO, almost all staff is "disgruntled" because of utterly corrupt and defunct leadership

  14. Links 17/05/2022: OpenSUSE Leap 15.4 Release Candidate

    Links for the day

  15. IRC Proceedings: Monday, May 16, 2022

    IRC logs for Monday, May 16, 2022

  16. Links 16/05/2022: FreeBSD 13.1 and Inkscape 1.2 Released

    Links for the day

  17. Archiving Latest Posts in Geminispace (Like a Dated Web Directory But for Gemini)

    Earlier today we saw several more people crossing over from the World Wide Web to Gemini; we're trying to make a decent aggregator and archive for the rapidly-expanding Geminispace, which will soon have 2,500 capsules that are known to Lupa alone

  18. Microsoft Vidal Does Not Want to Listen (USPTO is Just for Megacorporations)

    Microsoft Vidal knows her real bosses. They’re international corporations (multinationals like Microsoft), not American people.

  19. Links 16/05/2022: China Advances on GNU/Linux and Maui 2.1.2 is Out

    Links for the day

  20. Jim Zemlin: Chief Revenue Officer in 'Linux' Seat-Selling Foundation

    Board seats in the Linux Foundation are basically a product on sale, based internal documents

  21. Reminder: Linux Foundation's Last IRS Filing is Very Old (Same Year the CFO Left)

    People really need to ask the Linux Foundation, directly, why its filings are years behind; this seems like a sensitive subject

  22. Linux Foundation Does Not Speak for GNU/Linux Users

    There's a serious problem in the "Linux" world as the so-called 'Linux' Foundation claims to speak for us (the GNU/Linux community) while in fact speaking against us (on the payroll of those looking to extinguish us)

  23. IBM's Lennart Poettering on Breaking Software for Pseudo Novelty

    Recently-uploaded ELCE 2011 clip shows a panel with Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, Thomas Gleixner, Paul McKenney, and Lennart Poettering (relevant to novelty or perceived novelty that mostly degrades the experience of longtime users, e.g. Wayland and systemd)

  24. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, May 15, 2022

    IRC logs for Sunday, May 15, 2022

  25. Links 15/05/2022: Linux 5.18 RC7 and Calls for More Mass Surveillance

    Links for the day

  26. Audio: Mark Shuttleworth Marketed to Young Males, With Sexy Pictures

    The Web is rotting away, old links become broken links within months or years, so I’ve decided to encode a 3-minute segment of the whole as Ogg

  27. What a Difference Half a Decade Makes (When Linux Foundation is 'Having Fun')

    Media shaming campaigns may have taken their toll on the founder of Linux, who is now bossed by someone who rejects Linux and is married to a Microsoft booster. Like Richard Stallman under FSF guidance (and conditions for return, mostly for fear of further media assaults and attack dogs), he has become a more publicity-shy and private person. The Linux Foundation has in effect reduced the founder of what it’s called after (Linux) into a weekly release manager and mascot, whose brand it is gradually diluting/cheapening.

  28. Links 15/05/2022: GNU libiconv 1.17

    Links for the day

  29. [Meme] Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC) Cannot Be Reconciled With the Law

    Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC)? Impossible. But Team UPC counts on an endless torrent of fake news managing to convince you (and more importantly politicians) otherwise.

  30. Even Team Battistelli is Sometimes Admitting -- Out in Public! -- That Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Neither Legal Nor Desirable

    Daniel X. Thomas and other people who are “too old to punish” (consequences to their career profoundly minimised owing to seniority) are among those who push back against the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); any sane person — not a career-climbing litigation zealot — can identify the pertinent facts and realise that what’s going on here is an injustice of unprecedented proportions in the patent discipline

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