Reference: Fifa accused of cover up as it emerges World Cup bid report to be kept secret (does it have to involve sports and celebrities for mainstream media to care?)
THE internal and external affairs at the EPO look uglier by the day, if it's possible at all for things to get any uglier when staff already dies. The EPO crisis fascinates us enough to have already dedicated close to 1,500 articles to it. It won't stop until justice gets served and the EPO is (hopefully, if not too late) saved.
Guess King Battistelli's plan to fix the Euro Patent Office. Yep, give himself more power
The president of the European Patent Office has responded to a formal rebuke of efforts to impose his will on the organization by asking for more power.
The man who last week was called a disgrace to his country in the French National Assembly has been accused of targeting EPO staff who opposed his reforms and of running sham disciplinary hearings as part of a campaign of intimidation.
Some of Benoit Battistelli's reforms have been enacted, whereas others – especially those that grant the president additional powers and effectively place him above the EPO's independent review and appeal processes – have been bitterly fought.
Several staff members, including the staff union's secretary, were placed on administrative leave by Battistelli over a year ago and have been put through what many claim have been a series of illegal and irregular hearings.
In a decision that lent significant weight to the staff's complaints, those hearings were effectively nullified last week by the International Labour Organization Administration Tribunal (ILO-AT). The ILO-AT found that Benoit Battistelli had delegitimized the EPO's Appeals Committee (ApC) by inserting two staff "volunteers" on the five-person panel rather than allowing the EPO's central staff committee to select them. It also found the EPO's management had mishandled critical aspects of the appeals process.
But, true to form, Battistelli has reacted by doubling down.
[...]
Now that approach – of having two staff volunteers – has also been deemed illegal. So what is Battistelli's solution? That's right: to give him the power to appoint people to the Appeals Committee.
In a formal proposal to the EPO's General Consultative Committee, Battistelli has attempted to reintroduce a change to the EPO's "service regulations" that he previously put forward, but which was rejected.
Under his "new" proposal, "if the Central Staff Committee fails to make appointments to these bodies, the President shall take appropriate steps to ensure the necessary appointments, such as by drawing lots or calling for volunteers from among all elected Staff Committee members."
[...]
This approach – where Battistelli tells people what he wants to happen; is told that breaks the organization's rules; and then attempts to rewrite the rules to give him the power to do it regardless – has become the president's modi operandi and the reason he has been dubbed "King Battistelli."
A source close to the Staff Union of the European Patent Office said: “Once more we are sad that instead of fixing what he has broken (namely a functioning internal appeals committee), Battistelli’s new proposal shows that he solely aims to circumvent the central staff committee.”
They added that the staff committee had “solid legal reasons not to nominate staff into the internal committee after two of its members had been downgraded by Battistelli”.
New rule to be decided by the Council next week:
“if the Central Staff Committee, despite an invitation to do so, fails to make appointments to these bodies, the President shall take appropriate steps to ensure and make the necessary appointments, such as calling for volunteers or drawing lots from among eligible staff members.”
Attention: "from among eligible staff members" and not "from elected staff representatives". Deliberately. A very interesting phrase.
FACTS the two staff reps nominees resigned during autumn 2014 (since they could not perform their work as they should have, due to several defficiencies reported to Battistelli and left uncorrected on purpose). Following their resignation they have been publically defamed by VP4 and VP5 and then abusively disciplined (both downgraded).
Facing such appaling situation the CSC did not want to nominate anyone anew before the reported defficencies had been corredted and insurance had been given that the new nominees would not be again pressurized and sanctioned.
As you may imagine Battistelli did nothing to redress the internal appeal system he and his associates had broken. Instead Battistelli "invited" all CSC nominees (read threathened them of disciplinary santions) and the weakest "volunteered".
So much for independent judicial system at EPO
see here : http://techrights.org/2016/12/05/bunk-justice-at-epo/
Battistelli wants by all means to circumvent the staff representatives whom he truly hates since they do not wish to bend and praise his glory.
Battistelli's problem is simple: he is enarque functioning with a software dating back last century. He thinks he knows better only he does not - see the mess he created and he has proven incapable solving?
The accolytes he recruited are no better. They too think they know better but the world outside is laughing at the EPO which they see sinking for the past 3 years.
The new "solution" is likely (once more) not to fly at the ILO-AT. Let's see next week if the Administrative Council will approve that new pack of low quality legal work produced under the supervision of a German Vice President and a German Principal Directorate.
All this costs money and reputation. This "mis"management team should all be fired.
Sadly it would appear that Article 52 of the EPO Service Regulations does not appear to apply to the President, the Vice-Presidents or to the Legal Services Department of the EPO.
Section 2 - Dismissal by the appointing authority
Article 52 - Professional incompetence
(1) Subject to Article 23 of the Convention, a permanent employee who proves incompetent in the performance of his duties may be dismissed. The appointing authority may, however, offer to classify the employee concerned in a lower grade and to assign him to a post corresponding to this new grade.
(2) Any proposal for the dismissal of a permanent employee shall set out the reasons on which it is based and shall be communicated to the employee concerned. He shall be entitled to make any comments thereon which he considers relevant. The appointing authority shall take a reasoned decision, after following the procedure laid down in regard to disciplinary matters.
(3) Subject to Article 13, a permanent employee shall not be dismissed without notice. The notice shall be calculated on the basis of one month for each year of actual service; it shall not, however, be less than three months, nor greater than nine. The period of notice shall commence on the first day of the month following the date of notification of the decision to dismiss the employee. The period of notice shall be increased by one month for a permanent employee having his home as defined in Article 60, paragraph 2, in a country other than that in which he is employed.