Source (original): Rospatent
EARLIER this year and last week we mentioned the so-called 'social conference' [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], which relates to the social study [sic] commissioned by the liar (Battistelli) and his goons, relying on gross omissions and hired propaganda mills. Battistelli, being a politician, would go as far as necessary to protect his horrible regime, even if that means lying and insulting people's intelligence.
the stated purpose of the social conference is:
- presenting the results of the occupational health and safety risk assessment (ohsra) and the social study - forming working groups to discuss these results - work shops (by now these two points will be done on the same day as the presentations) - expected results of the working groups and the workshops are -_- an analysis how the previous reforms influenced the results of the social study and the ohsra -_- suggestions how the previous reforms need to be amended to restore social climate, of course without an impact on the results of these reforms (so continued abolishment of steps and career, lower salaries, increased work pressure, less secure pensions for newcomers, ...)
Both results will be presented to the AC, together with an analysis of the administration of these results, as well as an opinion on the studies by the administration. How can the administration coordinate the working grouos, and work on their own analysis, as well as waiting for the results and form an opinion on that all on the same day, without most of all that already pre-written? I bet they even prepared an analysis to be presented by the staff representative groups (FFPE, and the official Staff Representation)
I also wonder how they expect Staff Representation as well as FFPE to be able to actively particiate in all areas, when they do the working groups all at the same time, and will not allow sufficient "experts" to participate; no chance to discuss among themselves, and still deliver opinions on the same day which will be seen as representative of "all staff" if favourable for management, or "dissenting opinions of disgruntled single individuals" (a.k.a. violent and vocal minority) when not in favour of previous and future management actions.
I expect this whole exercise to deliver even more pre-cooked management "Bullshit-Bingo" catchwords without content, but used as justification to push the border of our legal issues even further....
Thanks for the explanation. It seems that we have yet another example of a classic BB strategy, namely "consultation" in the form of allowing others to speak but having no intention of listening to them (let alone taking heed of anything that is said).
Of course, this strategy has nothing to do with the dictionary (or commonly understood) definition of "consultation", but is good enough for political operators such as BB.
Quite frankly, the whole charade is just an insult to the intelligence of the staff representatives and all neutral observers. Not that this will stop the AC swallowing the results hook, line and sinker. What a debacle!
A patent is worth a lot of money. Personal data are the bibliographic data, payment method, communication with the EPO but also the application (claims/description).
It is incredible that the patent processing at the EPO is not in compliance with EU standards for data protection.