04.21.22
Gemini version available ♊︎A Month After the Massive Strike Across Europe the Union of EPO Workers Proceeds Against Salary Adjustment Procedure (Reduction), Based on Managers’ “Hoax”
Or: We finally see how very big lies backfire
Video download link | md5sum ecee09e81522f2a651bf1b65c10affe8
Next Steps at EPO
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0
Summary: With banksters [sic] running Europe’s second-largest institution and repeatedly breaking the law (while making up new roles, including theatrics — for optics — such as “new Ombuds service”) we expect things to worsen; the staff union thankfully strikes back
TOMORROW will be one month since the EPO strike and it’ll also be the last day for participation in the EPO Staff Survey. We hope that the lion’s share of staff will participate, showing just how much of a failure António Campinos really is; he’s hardly more popular than Benoît Battistelli, he’s just enjoying more complicit media.
The union of EPO staff is meanwhile pushing forth with a legal motion to thwart a financial/fiscal attack on staff and former staff (or even pensioners).
Here is the full letter as text:
21 April 2022
su22023cp – 0.2.1/5.2Appeals against the salary adjustment for 2021 – test-case procedures
Dear SUEPO members,
In July 2021, SUEPO provided model appeals to its members for challenging the Salary Adjustment Procedure and its implementation for 2021. Many of you lodged internal appeals on this basis.
Recently, the Appeals Committee sent emails to appellants in this regard with reference to RI/2021/054 (active staff) and RI/2021/055 (pensioners). They asked the appellants on their opinion on the suitability of a test-case procedure and as to their wish to volunteer as test appellant.
For the sake of procedural efficiency, SUEPO considers a test-case procedure adequate. The law firm which SUEPO entrusted with the appeals informed the Appeals Committee that they were ready to represent the already existing groups of test appellants who gave them their mandate in a test-case procedure.
SUEPO is of the opinion that with the appellants nominated by the law firm, a sufficient number of volunteers are available for the test-case procedure. In our view, it is therefore not necessary for further appellants to volunteer to take part in the test-case procedure.
Your SUEPO Central Bureau
As noted in the video at the top, we’re planning to do a lot more coverage about patents, but over the past week or so we’ve handled a number of operational changes to increase efficiency and make the data (and its backups) more robust. The Web site epo.org is busy pretending, as of today, (warning: epo.org link) that this corrupt institution is subjected to an ombudsman (false, it scuttled the auditory function (Audit Committee)), but this is what one gets inside organisations that are governed by unqualified liars. Misleading the public by constantly lying about (or redefining) “quality” is the first step towards an even bigger lie, such as a reckless and unaccountable institution having “new Ombuds service” and an institution that engages in illegal surveillance (even espionage) having data protection policies, officer, and so on. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA