New document from the Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO)

Summary: The sabotage/demolition job of Benoît Battistelli is continued by António Campinos, who is "finishing the job" of Battistelli (the second term, which he bribed all the voters for, started 4 days ago)

LESS THAN A WEEK AGO the staff union of the EPO (SUEPO) published a document about BTT, which was also mentioned here yesterday and covered earlier today as a video.

We intend to record a video about the document below very shortly, but here is the text in isolation without any further commentary from us (except it seems like a big mistake to feed all the messages to Microsoft, in spite of known privacy abuses and ongoing lawsuits):

29 June 2023 su23008hp

Issues with BTT – more than just teething problems

“It is a mess. Somebody will get a bonus for it. Business as usual."¹

Dear SUEPO Members, dear colleagues,

BTT (Bringing Teams Together) is now in full swing, with a large majority of our colleagues already in their new (for-a-day) locations, and the echoes we get are not exactly positive. The administration is not planning on asking staff what they think about the entire exercise, so we did a short poll with SUEPO The Hague. Some 350 colleagues responded in short notice and provided a whole host of comments in that survey, and we want to summarise some of its findings here.

ChatGPT’s take on the comments received All strung together, the comments from the survey amount for 21 pages of disheartening reading – the level of disengagement, estrangement and disappointment with the EPO is concerning. We thought of asking ChatGPT to summarise all this text, and after being fed the survey comments as input and being asked to provide a 1-paragraph summary, the result was the following:

The implementation of the "Bringing our Teams Together" (BTT) project has resulted in employees feeling ostracized and undervalued as they are forced out of their offices. The project fails to deliver on its promise of individual accommodation and damages office culture and team cohesion. Communication and implementation are chaotic, leading to a loss of trust and morale. The project promotes a two-class society and remote work, undermining team unity and creating a sense of disconnection from the office. Management's handling of the project is seen as incompetent and lacking consideration for staff well-being. Overall, the BTT project is viewed as a misguided waste of time, impacting attendance and work quality, and failing to achieve its objectives. It fosters division, discrimination, and frustration among

_____ ¹ An illustrative one of the many comments received in the survey

---

employees while sacrificing their well-being and working conditions for cost-saving purposes. The administration's tactics and disregard for employees' interests are condemned, reflecting a negative atmosphere and undermining performance. The project is deemed unnecessary, divisive, and detrimental to the long-term interests of the EPO.

It captures remarkably well the feeling one gets when reading through the comments. We tried to extract some bullet points from the survey comments and boiled it down to 6 pages worth, which (it takes a bit of searching) even hosts some – albeit very few - positive comments.

Some statistics The survey enquired about the room distribution policy, where about 50% of the respondents are now in a ‘Workplace for the day’ setup, with slightly less than 40% reporting a single allocated workplace and some 10% reporting a shared-space allocated workplace.

The room allocation policy gives a very mixed picture. Despite promises to that effect – and several CSC publications reminding the administration², only 1 in 3 respondents state that their team used the “3 days/week on site” as a rule: in 20% at least 4 or even 5 days on site were required to get an allocated workplace, and more worryingly in close to 30% of the replies it seems that the allocation policy was unknown or seemingly random. 3% of the respondents state that there were no allocated workplaces in their team – and in only 2% of the cases there seems to have been a team discussion, with the team preferences leading the allocation policy. Far away from the stated aims.

When asked whether they intended to work more, or less, from the EPO offices, some 40% indicated their intention was to work less / as little as possible from the EPO, about 30% intended to work more / as much as possible from the office with the remainder not intending to change their habits, or unsure yet (3%).

_____ ² CSC Publications of 13-03-2023, 13-02-2023, 30-01-2023, 13-01-2023, 08-12-2023, 25-11-2023 on BTT

---

Remarkably, when asked whether they thought the impact on staff would be positive / negative / neutral – and when asked similarly whether the impact on the EPO (as an organisation) would be positive / negative / neutral, respondents replied strongly in the negative.

2 out of 3 respondents feel that the impact of BTT on staff is negative, only 5% sees a positive impact; 3 out of 4 respondents feel that the impact of BTT on the EPO is negative, with only 6% seeing a positive impact. This means that even the people that got an allocated workplace, even the ones that intend to work more from the EPO, see a negative impact on themselves, their colleagues, and this organisation.

It seems the administration could not have been more wrong with the implementation of this project.

Your SUEPO TH Committee

We'll discuss this in an upcoming video. ⬆