Bonum Certa Men Certa

According to EPO Data, Women Have No Place at the EPO (Unless They Fancy Being Underpaid)



Video download link | md5sum 6a75e66c2e1b725c93741f0086aca5a7 EPO Exploits Women Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0



Summary: The European Patent Office, accused by a former president who was female of an "alphamale" issue, treats women poorly; incidentally, she wasn't just the only female president in a ~25 year period but also the only non-French president in that same period (EPO diversity is a sad farce)

The Central Staff Committee of the European Patent Office (EPO) has circulated a new series about gender discrimination at the EPO. The staff union has long spoken about some aspects of this; now there are some solid numbers that support the allegations. Even the Administrative Council was concerned about this. Only hours ago the EPO's management boasted about (warning: epo.org link) the exploitative and likely illegal Pan-European Seal Programme, dubbing it "Nurturing next generation IP talent" and noting a female majority. The timing was interesting and it also said nothing about how grossly underpaid those people are.



"The EPO signals to women that they would be treated well (at least in public), whereas private data suggests otherwise."The female president of the EPO was muscled out by what she dubbed "alphamale" [1, 2] (Benoît Battistelli), followed by his corrupt successor, António Campinos, who mostly surrounds himself by friends, not qualified management.

It is expected that, especially as the next meeting of the Administrative Council fast approaches, there will be more publications on this topic. Here's the first message of more to come (the significance will become more apparent over time and is of interest to the public in general as the EPO isn't a private company, it just casually acts like one).

Rewards Exercise 2022: Overview and gender pay gap

Dear colleagues,

Every July the Office proudly announces the results of the yearly reward exercise. This year was no different, with the Office’s publication concerning the reward exercise of 2022 “Celebrating outstanding achievements with an inclusive approach”. In an effort to improve the transparency of the practice, the annual announcement is accompanied by a document containing the detailed statistics, which provide breakdowns of different divisions of our EPO population. We appreciate having access to the data, since it allows for an analysis of the distribution of the rewards despite being far from complete (i.e. lacking data on functional allowances).

The staff representation has carefully examined the data provided this year and for previous years and will make a short series of publications detailing our analysis:

Part one: Overview of the findings

Part two: Widening the Gender Pay Gap

Over the coming weeks, subsequent editions in this series on the rewards exercise will be published that take a closer look at a number of topics that have given us cause for concern.

Sincerely yours,

The Central Staff Committee


We've taken the liberty to republish those first two parts as HTML. The European public deserves to see what's being done in its name. Here's Part 1 (original shown in the video above):

Zentraler Personalausschuss Central Staff Committee Le Comité Central du Personnel

Munich, 16/09/2022 sc22120cp

Rewards Exercise 2022:



Part 1 – Overview



Introduction Every July the Office proudly announces the results of the yearly reward exercise. This year was no different, with the Office’s publication concerning the reward exercise of 2022 “Celebrating outstanding achievements with an inclusive approach”. In an effort to improve the transparency of the practice, the annual announcement is accompanied by a document containing the detailed statistics, which provide breakdowns of different divisions of our EPO population. We appreciate having access to the data, since it allows for an analysis of the distribution of the rewards despite being far from complete (i.e. lacking data on functional allowances). Your staff representation has carefully examined the data provided this year and for previous years.

This paper is the first part in a short series of publications detailing our analysis. The present document gives an overview of our findings. Over the coming weeks, subsequent editions in this series on the rewards exercise will be published that take a closer look at a number of topics that have given us cause for concern.

Unequal treatment between men and women

"Women have received, on average, only 0.88 steps to every 1 step awarded to men"One of the most alarming issues that we have revealed is the difference in treatment between men and women, consistent through recent years. The Office claims that “the gender gap continued to close”, but this is a very naïve and misleading summary of the situation. In fact, the reward system is being used as a tool to increase the gender pay gap, and the cumulative effect is crippling. Our detailed analysis exposes the reality, that women are progressing more slowly in their careers due to the receiving only 0.88 steps for every step awarded to a man, are significantly less likely to receive a double step, and have to wait longer for a promotion.

"Men are 54% more likely to receive a double step compared to women"Further analysis will be presented in the coming publications that give details on other groups of staff including those who have been on maternity leave, recent recruits, part-time staff, and Job-Group-6 staff. These are all groups who have been under-rewarded in past periods and are yet to see any mitigating measures.

Decreasing the rewards budget

"The budget set by the AC, in real terms is decreasing year on year"Regarding the budget allotted to the reward exercise, we found that the yearly budget for pensionable rewards is decreasing year on year, and does not keep up with inflation. Furthermore, the President sets his own budget which is always lower than that approved by the AC, and even then does not manage to spend the entirety of the lowered budget. The amount of budget which could have been used to reward staff is not negligible – it amounts to 18.88 million euros, which is enough to give one step to every eligible employee.

"The budget withheld from staff since 2015 is enough to give one step to every eligible employee"Transparent or opaque? Some of you may have seen our report on the feedback we received from our observer in the Harmonisation Committee, and will appreciate that there is plenty to be improved upon when it comes to “transparency” in the proceedings. If the systematic issues of discrimination are not being discussed by management behind the closed doors, we wonder what is happening there, and what exactly are they harmonising?

Conclusions Although in some areas there are signs of limited effort to reduce the unfairness, in other areas the problems remain and appear to not have even been identified by the administration. Furthermore, the impact of previous reward exercises cannot be ignored. It is incredibly saddening that the EPO is not able to treat its employees fairly when managerial discretion is introduced, and allows discrimination to grow. A genuine effort will be required in the upcoming rewards exercises if one ever wants to close the existing gaps.

As time goes by, the new career system continues to be a “winner-takes-all” system, with a small group progressing fast, and an increasingly large group that have seen their careers grinding to a halt, progressing ever slower. It proves itself to be anything but a merit-based system.

More to come! Watch this space for a more detailed analysis of specific aspects of the rewards exercises in the weeks to come.

Your Central Staff Committee



And here's Part II:

Zentraler Personalausschuss Central Staff Committee Le Comité Central du Personnel

Munich, 16/09/2022 sc22121cp

Rewards Exercise 2022:

Part 2 – Widening the Gender Pay Gap



Old vs New Career System Prior to 2015, the EPO was doing some things right in terms of gender pay equality – both men and women were subject to the same salary progression within a grade – automatic steps up to the end of a grade (bearing in mind that there also used to be 13 steps per grade in the old salary scales), with managerial discretion only applied for decisions on promotions to the next grade.

Since 2015, when the new career system came into force, managerial discretion is now applied for all decisions on salary progression – both steps and promotions. It is now clear that, once the possibility arose, management was not able to resist the temptation to discriminate against women. The statistics shown in the figure below undisputedly expose that the new career system has created a gender pay gap.

EPO gender gap graph #1: Rate of allocation of any pensionable reward % of eligibile men and women

Women’s career progression is a fraction of the men’s The Office insists that its efforts made to close the gender gap in the reward distribution should be recognized. However, the damage has been done, and the new career system has resulted in women progressing slower through their careers, thus increasing the gender pay gap. In fact, over the last 7 years, women received only 0.88 steps for every step awarded to men. We cannot find any reason to celebrate the fact that our management continues to discriminate against women, albeit less than a few years ago, and we cannot understand why the Office drags its feet in correcting such evident discrimination.

A diverse and inclusive organisation? – Not where it pretends For many years, the Office has boasted of its achievements in diversity and inclusion, yet it has never managed to reward men and women equally, not even in a single year. Furthermore, if we look more closely at the data and separate the pensionable rewards into single step, double step, or promotion rewards then we see further problems. When looking at single step allocation (top graph below), the difference between men and women isn’t so stark – in some years women were even rewarded one step more often than men. However, for double step rewards and promotions (bottom two graphs below), women are systematically and consistently under-rewarded when compared to men. We find some very troubling statistics – men are 54% more likely to receive a double step than women, and men are 19% more likely to be promoted (when eligible) than women. Here, the Office has done nothing to address the issue, since the trend is stable.

EPO gender gap graph #2: Rate of allocation of one step for men and women; Rate of allocation of double steps for men and women; Rate of allocation of promotions to those eligible for men and women

The cumulative effect of this under-rewarding of women on the gender pay gap must not be underestimated, and this enduring bias is simply not worthy of an international organisation. The Office is also silent on any possible measures to correct the discrimination that has happened since the introduction of the New Career System – is this because they think that the system is fair and women deserve fewer rewards and lower pay?

Staff on maternity leave The Office also proclaims that it is making an effort to reward staff who have been on maternity leave. There, we see a significant improvement during the last two reward exercises. However, for the first six reward exercises, staff on maternity leave were rewarded significantly below average, as is readily evident from the data provided by the Office below.

EPO gender gap graph #3: Rate of allocation of total pensionable rewards for maternity leave and EPO average

Conclusions In order to correct the serious errors of the past, staff members who were disadvantaged in the reward exercises since 2015 should now be compensated for their slower careers in the previous years. Inaction in this situation constitutes an admission on the part of our management that their claimed dedication to diversity and inclusion, and closing the gender pay gap, is just a smoke screen. We invite our management to open discussions on potential resolutions to these systemic issues.

Your Central Staff Committee


There's some discussion of the context of this in the video above. The EPO signals to women that they would be treated well (at least in public), whereas private data suggests otherwise.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Early Retirement Age: Linus Torvalds Turns 55 Next Week
Now he's almost eligible for retirement in certain European countries
Gemini Links 22/12/2024: Solstice and IDEs
Links for the day
BetaNews: Microsoft Slop is Your "Latest Technology News"
Paid-for garbage disguised as "journalism"
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, December 21, 2024
IRC logs for Saturday, December 21, 2024
Links 21/12/2024: EU on Solidarity with Ukraine, Focus on Illegal and Unconstitutional Patent Court in the EU (UPC)
Links for the day
[Meme] Microsofters at the End of David's Leash
Hand holding the leash. Whose?
Deciphering Matt's Take on WordPress, Which is Under Attack From Microsofters-Funded Aggravator
the money sponsoring the legal attacks on WordPress and on Matt is connected very closely to Microsoft
Gemini Links 21/12/2024: Projections, Dead Web ('Webapps' Replacing Pages), and Presentation of Pi-hole
Links for the day
American Samoa One of the Sovereign States Where Windows Has Fallen Below 1% (and Stays Below It)
the latest data plotted in LibreOffice
[Meme] Brian's Ravioli
An article per minute?
Links 21/12/2024: "Hey Hi" (AI) or LLM Bubble Criticised by Mainstream Media, Oligarchs Try to Control and Shut Down US Government
Links for the day
LLM Slop is Ruining the Media and Ruining the Web, Ignoring the Problem or the Principal Culprits (or the Slop Itself) Is Not Enough
We need to encourage calling out the culprits (till they stop this poor conduct or misconduct)
Christmas FUD From Microsoft, Smearing "SSH" When the Real Issue is Microsoft Windows
And since Microsoft's software contains back doors, only a fool would allow any part of SSH on Microsoft's environments, which should be presumed compromised
Paywalls, Bots, Spam, and Spyware is "Future of the Media" According to UK Press Gazette
"managers want more LLM slop"
Google Has Mass Layoffs (Again), But the Problem is Vastly Larger
started as a rumour about January 2025
On BetaNews Latest Technology News: "We are moderately confident this text was [LLM Chatbot] generated"
The future of newsrooms or another site circling down the drain with spam, slop, or both?
"The Real New Year" is Now
Happy solstice
Microsoft OSI Reads Techrights Closely
Microsoft OSI has also fraudulently attempted to censor Techrights several times over the years
"Warning About IBM's Labor Practices"
IBM is not growing and its revenue is just "borrowed" from companies it is buying; a lot of this revenue gets spent paying the interest on considerable debt
[Meme] The Easier Way to Make Money
With patents...
The Curse (to Microsoft) of the Faroe Islands
The common factor there seems to be Apple
Electronic Frontier Foundation Defends Companies That Attack Free Speech Online (Follow the Money)
One might joke that today's EFF has basically adopted the same stance as Donald Trump and has a "warm spot" for BRICS propaganda
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, December 20, 2024
IRC logs for Friday, December 20, 2024
Gemini Links 21/12/2024: Death of Mike Case, Slow and Sudden End of the Web
Links for the day
Links 20/12/2024: Security Patches, Openwashing by Open Source Initiative, Prison Sentence for Bitcoin Charlatan and Fraud
Links for the day
Another Terrible Month for Microsoft in Web Servers
Consistent downward curve
LLM Slop Disguised as Journalism: The Latest Threat to the Web
A lot of it is to do with proprietary GitHub, i.e. Microsoft
Gemini Links 20/12/2024: Regulation and Implementing Graphics
Links for the day
Links 20/12/2024: Windows Breaks Itself, Mass Layoffs Coming to Google Again (Big Wave)
Links for the day
Microsoft: "Upgrade" to Vista 11 Today, We'll Brick Your Audio and You Cannot Prevent This
Windows Update is obligatory, so...
The Unspeakable National Security Threat: Plasticwares as the New Industrial Standard
Made to last or made to be as cheap as possible? Meritocracy or industrial rat races are everywhere now.
Microsoft's All-Time Lows in Macao and Hong Kong
Microsoft is having a hard time in China, not only for political reasons
[Meme] "It Was Like a Nuclear Winter"
This won't happen again, will it?
If You Know That Hey Hi (AI) is Hype, Then Stop Participating in It
bogus narrative of "Hey Hi (AI) arms race" and "era/age of Hey Hi" and "Hey Hi Revolution"
Bangladesh (Population Close to 200 Million) Sees Highest GNU/Linux Adoption Levels Ever
Microsoft barely has a grip on this country. It used to.
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, December 19, 2024
IRC logs for Thursday, December 19, 2024