05.21.17
New Documents Help Demonstrate That ILO Delivers Institutional Injustice to EPO Employees and Cushions Team Battistelli
Summary: The International Labour Organisation Administrative Tribunal (ILOAT) delivers not justice but merely the illusion of justice, probably in defiance of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
THE International Labour Organisation (ILO) has become somewhat of a sham. To many, ILO has become just about as destructive as the management of the EPO. It’s part of the same framework of hopelessness, discouragement, waste of time, and waste of money (legal fees). It is a very sad fact that the supposed safeguard of workers’ rights has inadvertently guarded the EPO‘s immunity rather than EPO staff. In fact, Dutch authorities, having been misled by EPO management, have come to believe that ILO is some sort of independent and effective arbiter, peripheral to Team Battistelli rather than almost submissive to it.
“…Dutch authorities, having been misled by EPO management, have come to believe that ILO is some sort of independent and effective arbiter, peripheral to Team Battistelli rather than almost submissive to it.”The latest two documents, shown above with redactions, are just some among many we have seen regarding a variety of cases involving different individuals. Many people are on the same boat. They cannot, based on the experience of others, believe that ILO tribunals can ever offer real reprieve. Even in the rare cases when they actually issue a ruling (not just the typical deferrals) and when the EPO loses the dispute, Battistelli more or less ignores or works around the ruling. Compliance is not an option. In other words, Battistelli not only snubs European governments but also international bodies that are supposed to govern/supervise/police him. It’s a problem that’s akin to the Administrative Council led by Battistelli’s ‘chinchilla’. It’s truly despicable.
Readers should expect us to examine these issues more closely in the coming months if not years. We also invite readers to send to us material related to their ILO cases. Our publications of material are consensual and are subjected to careful scrutiny.
The understand the importance of the above documents, consider what these demonstrate. 30 days only are given for the complainants to respond (the complainants is also slowed down by a chronic disease and is being overburdened by unreasonable demands, bombarded with piles of papers etc.) and the process is being delayed (+60 days, i.e. 90 days in total) for the EPO. This disproportionate and asymmetric legal spiel obviously is designed — willingly or not — to help the EPO ‘win’, even if by simply exhausting the other side (emotionally if not financially too).
“ILO is not doing its job properly and the Dutch government ought to know this. Its excuses are not valid and immunity needs to be removed.”No reaction by ILOAT, in spite of a chronic disease, says quite a lot. These are insensitive people who are either apathetic/uninterested in tackling EPO cases or simply want the EPO to ‘win’ all of these case. If they are incapable of dealing with EPO-induced workload, then they should not only state so publicly but also make a stronger statement, along with action, to that effect. They could, for example, herald the failure of their own system and pursue remediation at an international level. Instead, they carry on pretending that they can cope with this mess. They would rather mask/hide these failures to protect their own interests.
“My right to be heard and to respond is violated,” told us an involved person, hence “no fair trial under Art. 6 ECHR!”
This is a high priority matter. ILO is not doing its job properly and the Dutch government ought to know this. Its excuses are not valid and immunity needs to be removed. The abuses by the EPO’s management need to be studied by ECHR and people punished accordingly (although the concept of accountability barely exists in international contexts). █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA