EPO Education: Workers Resort to Legal Actions (Many Cases) Against the Administration
UNDER the reign of Benoît Battistelli (2010-2018) and António Campinos (2018 to present), two Frenchmen not qualified to run the EPO (it's all nepotism and buying elections using bribes), everything has been shattered to pieces, including the EPO's reputation, which took decades of hard work to earn (examiners had been picky about what patents can be granted and what complies with the EPC, not what brings greater "profit" to the Office). Now they're just flinging lots of fake patents at corporations, including software patents - i.e. patents which are both illegal and universally despised by software developers. The corrupt managers know exactly what they're doing. It's intentional. They also know that it's illegal, so they've constructed fake courts that are both illegal and unconstitutional. If the Kremlin's goal was to make Europe more like the Russian Empire, then it's succeeding. The EU is thoroughly impacted.
At the moment the casualties of EPO corruption include the EPO's own staff - mostly examiners who are gradually being 'robbed', possibly because the Office wishes to drive away good examiners with professional integrity. Cuts to their benefits have gone on for well over a decade and now they do more about it. To quote a new publication from SUEPO TH committee (Staff Union of the EPO The Hague committee):
Education and Childcare Allowance reform - latest news
No ILOAT complaint for the general case but file your individual appeal
Dear SUEPO members, dear colleagues,
General complaints not receivable by Appeals Committee, but …
Before the ‘but…’ let’s first refresh our memories.
As indicated in our previous publication on the Education and Childcare Allowance reform, with the help of SUEPO, staff members filed case number RI 2022-011 challenging the general decisions presented in CA/D 4/21 and Circular 411.
The Appeals Committee (ApC) considered that the above general case filed by many colleagues was not receivable because the impact of the reform had not yet adversely affected them.
Following consultation with SUEPO lawyers (our experts in international labour law), we have been advised not to pursue it in front of the Tribunal at this time. According to our counsel, despite the lack of receivability for the general case, (and here’s the but…)
… individual legal cases, after colleagues have suffered a detriment, will be receivable.
SUEPO members might ask why they were advised to file the general case in the first place? Three reasons:
Firstly, we wanted to avoid individuals (and their dependants) suffering a detriment,
Secondly to ensure that the argument of not having complained against the reform when it first entered into force would not be used against them at the later time of filing their individual cases, and
Finally, to avoid the inference that by not complaining the changes had been accepted.
A couple of cases of this cluster are still running in front of the Appeals Committee and we will keep you informed on their results.
Although the above might seem like good news for the EPO, which is claiming to look to reduce litigation in front of the ILOAT[1], the general case is only the tip of a growing iceberg. The ramifications of the Education Allowance reform have led to a proliferation of individual legal cases[2], not to mention the frustration and sense of betrayal that it is causing the colleagues concerned.
We don’t want to wait for individuals and their families to suffer a detriment before finding a solution.
We don’t want the internal system clogged up with individual complaints.
We do want to work with the administration to find solutions, so…
… We would like to once again invite the administration to enter meaningful social dialogue on the topic of revising the reform. This would be a first step to sustainably reduce the number of complaints and would show that the Office is genuinely interested in reducing litigation and avoiding causing a detriment to staff and their families.For the time being, in accordance with the Appeals Committee opinion, when the education and childcare allowance reform manifests a negative impact on your personal situation, file your individual legal case. As always do not hesitate to contact us for assistance.
“Defend your rights, file your individual appeal”
Kind regards,
Your SUEPO TH committee – M18B10 and De Bruyn Kopsstraat, 15, Rijswijk
PS: SUEPO legal cases are prepared by lawyers specialized in international labour law, and the associated costs are covered by the yearly contributions of union members. A warm thank you to our faithful members!
[...]
[1] See “Exchanges with Staff Representation on ILOAT”, EPO, 13.6.2024.
[2] Education allowance reform, 24.09.2024, SUEPO TH, Exchanges with the Administration on the Education Allowance, 23.05.2024, SUEPO TH
Many of the links above are behind a paywall, but sufficient verbal context is provided. In short, they tell staff to "file your individual legal case" and one can expect to see an outcome, perhaps next year.
If the EPO manages to keep good examiners, Europe will be better off. If the EPO recruits mere rubber-stampers, law firms and aggressive lawyers (working for patent trolls and foreign companies) will be better off. All they want is litigation. Merit of cases doesn't matter. They profit either way. █