12.12.20

António Campinos Has Been a ‘Lame Duck’ for Nearly Two Years Now, But the Administrative Council Failed to Act

Posted in Europe, Patents at 11:02 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

This year, according to a survey, only 1 in 33 or 1 in 34 members of staff can still trust Campinos (the Administrative Council is trusted by 0%, based on that same survey)

Lame duck
Reference: Lame duck

Summary: As escalations from the Chairman of the Central Staff Committee show, it was around spring of 2019 that Campinos lost control and people lost trust in him (or honeymoon period was over, as the metaphor/saying goes)

BACK in March of last year staff representatives at the EPO (Central Staff Committee) spoke to constituents/staff about “[a]djustments to the new career system” (that was before breakdown of talks with António Campinos; still a ‘grace period’ after 8 years of Benoît Battistelli).

The open letter is reproduced in full below and it speaks of “a first VICO “kick-off” meeting”, reminding us that the term has been used since (at least) last year and it’s not a substitute for trials or formal appeals:

Reference: sc19041cl-0.3.1/4.2.1/6.1
Date: 19.03.2019

Mr António Campinos
President of the EPO

ISAR – R.1081

OPEN LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT

Setting-up a Working Group (WG) on adjustments to the performance management system and procedure for incompetence

Dear Mr President,

The CSC thanks you for your letter dated 22 February 2019 in which you propose to resume discussions started in 2018 and reconvene the WG on performance management and procedure for incompetence. We welcome your declaration that “any career and performance management has to be regularly reviewed and adapted”. As a first step, we have accepted the invitation to a first VICO “kick-off” meeting to take place on 21 March.

Composition of the Working Group
It would appear that the main interlocutor involved from the side of the Administration is one who has shaped (the implementation of) the performance management system, with somewhat limited success. By contrast, we believe it is necessary to equip your delegation with nominees whose presence does not preclude any success of the working groups ab initio.

Mandate / scope
In view of the short duration of this first meeting, we propose to focus our discussions on the mandate of this working group and the time frame for its work. Some guiding principles for the working group could (in our view) be based upon input we have already provided to you with our documents:
- “Position of the CSC with regard of performance management” (sc18154cl sent as annex to our letter sc18153cl dated 14 November
2018);
- Annex 1 “Adapting the career system to EPO needs” to our letter sc18138cl dated 19 October 2018;
- Our letter sc18121cl on Article 52 (procedure for incompetence).


While our nominees will reference these documents as a starting point for the discussions in the working group to establish its mandate, we do not forget the deliverable that is expected to come out of it: proposals for (necessary) change.

The CSC remains convinced that there is an urgent need to amend the current career system to make it fit for an Office granting high quality patents, to motivate staff and to reduce litigation while ensuring long term sustainability.

A first step of devising fair transitional measures (with a corresponding budget) from the previous to the current career system, as was done in the EU institutions, could address past litigation. Further amendments to the system, as a result of successful social dialogue, might lead to increased transparency, thereby avoiding discrimination and perhaps preventing further litigation. It would also foster staff engagement.

The members of the Working Group appointed by the CSC look forward to receiving the statistical data on the implementation of the New Career System since 2015 onwards (requested with our letter sc19040cl dated 8 March 2019).

Finally, our expert nominees are looking forward to collaborating with the career specialists you will appoint from your side to try and ensure that this new working group delivers proposals for change that are to the benefit of the EPO and its staff.

Yours sincerely,

Chairman of the Central Staff Committee

Enclosures in electronic form:
Letter sc18121cl
Letter sc19040cl

“The President proposed to resume discussions started in 2018 and reconvene the WG on the performance management system and procedure for incompetence,” said the Chairman of the Central Staff Committee. “We believe that the composition of the WG is essential to be able to deliver proposals for change.”

“This was shortly before the faked financial ‘analysis’ (justifying the robbery of present and past staff, mostly for gambling purposes).”It is important to remind ourselves that at this stage the representatives were still hopeful, trying to be optimistic as if there’s a chance of a real turnaround. “A first step of devising fair transitional measures from the previous to the current career system,” they wrote, “as was done in the EU institutions, could address past litigation.”

This was shortly before the faked financial ‘analysis’ (justifying the robbery of present and past staff, mostly for gambling purposes). Future staff? What future? The EPO plans layoffs, not recruitment. The destruction of the Office is already underway.

Exactly one week later those same staff representatives spoke of “[w]orrying performance assessment for 2018″. Here’s the full letter, signed by the same people with copies sent to Vice Presidents Stephen Rowan, Nellie Simon, and Christoph Ernst:

Reference: sc19039cl-0.3.1/4.2.1
Date: 08.03.2019

Mr António Campinos
President of the EPO

ISAR – R.1081

Performance Assessment for 2018

Dear Mr President,

The Staff Representation feels obliged to report to you on the enormous anxiety, worry and demotivation among many of our colleagues caused by the performance assessment for the year 2018, confirmed by the quite negative hands-on experience of many colleagues in the assessment exercise in the last few weeks.

In particular, the CSC sees an urgent need to discuss with you one recent publication:

- Guidance to performance assessment 2018 – Performance assessment of examiners and formalities officers of 19th February 2019.

This document includes crucial elements of the system for structuring the planning and evaluation of the work of about five thousand employees in DG1. The document establishes a classification with four possible grades:

• above the expected level
• at the expected level
• below the expected level or even
• far below the expected level

A very similar scale based system ranging from (1) “Excellent” to (5) “unsatisfactory” also existed in the performance assessment system described in Circular 246 until the year 2014, with the fundamental difference that it also comprised a fifth possible, positive evaluation:

• (1) – Excellent, which corresponded to a level “far above the expected level”


Since the founding of the European Patent Organisation, however, the number of employees with a negative assessment – below or far below the expected level – has been consistently very small, indeed almost negligible1. This has also been the result of a very careful recruitment procedure, where the competencies and skills are monitored at the beginning.

Such a distribution of individual assessments seems to be still in line with “normal” national and international administrations.

This year, possibly for the first time in the forty years of the Organisation’s history, the Staff Representation is observing an abrupt change in the hitherto essentially consistent assessment system, and many colleagues are reporting that their performance will be evaluated “below” or “far below” the expected level, much worse than what should be expected.

Historical trends and statistics may be unpopular with (some) managers or consultants. However, we fail to understand why an institution praised as a leading actor in IP matters worldwide should set its own standards in such a manner that it ends up portraying itself as relying to quite an extent on the work of staff it considers unable to meet their “targets”. Importantly, it is not plausible at all that more than 30% of the highly educated and carefully selected staff members in DG1 will become “underperformers” overnight.

Moreover, and contrary to the past, consultation with the Staff Representation on the Guidance to performance assessment has not taken place2, which leaves doubts whether an improvement in management style is intended at all. Further it appears that reference figures, for example reference examiners, so-called “corridors”, etc. are neither public nor have they been a matter of consultation with the Staff Representation. We cannot see any improvement on that front either.

In fact the announced performance assessment system appears as continuing, or even reinforcing, past and outdated prejudices against staff, in particular Examiners and Formalities Officers. It is completely at odds with your intention to establish a renewed and genuine (social) dialogue based on pride and “engagement”: this system and its implementation cannot but be regarded as a slap in the face for all DG1 employees.

____
1 This margin has been kept throughout all subsequent performance management systems (see for example previous Circular no. 246, item A. (5), CODEX March 2015). It is also referred to in the Joint Communiqué from VP1, VP2 and the CSC to all DG1 and DG2 examining staff ProPro ll for 2004, 2005 in Munich. This document, signed by the then Vice-President DG1, the Vice-President DG2 and the Chairman of the CSC, confirmed that only 0,9% of the Examiners were given – in the year 2004 – a productivity box marking below 3 (good).
2 The guidance to performance assessment refers to the amended version of circular 366 (“New Circular 366”). This circular has not entered into force, but was withdrawn before any discussion in the GCC meeting of December 2018.


In addition, the consequence of an abnormal number of negative appraisal reports will in all likelihood be an increased number of conciliation/objection procedures before the Appraisals Committee possibly followed by ILOAT complaints, which is not in the common interest of the EPO and of the employees.

It is worth noting that, in the past, with the existing conciliation procedure in place including a neutral mediator, a settlement rate of 80% of cases prior to further litigation could be achieved. The abolishment of neutral mediators, together with the introduction of the New Career System abruptly stopped this trend in the year 2014 in favour of litigation, quickly tunnelled to the ILOAT by the so-called “Appraisals Committee”3.

Conclusion and requests

Having in mind that the reporting exercise for the year 2018 will be finalised during the spring of 2019, this is a matter that cannot really wait and a dedicated meeting on this particular topic would need to be arranged at your earliest convenience. Appropriate measures have to be envisaged urgently in order to avoid further damage to staff and to our Organisation.

Regards / sincerely

Joachim Michels
Chairman of the Central Staff Committee

cc.: Vice-President DG1; Mr Stephen Rowan
Vice-President DG4; Ms Nellie Simon
Vice-President DG5; Mr Christoph Ernst

____
3 The Appraisals Committee does not fulfil minimum requirements of a balanced composition and impartiality, since the Staff Representation is excluded.

Long story short, the EPO is ‘re-engineering’ the appraisal process to be more biased against staff and justify dismissals, layoffs etc.

The lame ducks depicted in this Clifford K. Berryman cartoon are defeated Democrats heading to the White House hoping to secure political appointments from then President Woodrow Wilson.“Already in early March,” the representatives note, “we felt obliged to report to the President the enormous anxiety, worry and demotivation among many colleagues caused by the performance assessment for the year 2018, confirmed by the quite negative hands-on experience of many colleagues in the assessment exercise in the last few weeks.”

“The destruction of the Office is already underway.”“Therefore,” they add, “we proposed an urgent dedicated meeting on this particular topic to avoid further damage to staff and to our Organisation.”

We already know what happened in weeks that followed; talks basically broke down completely. But it was around that time when things soured and hopes turned into major disappointment. Not to say this is some sort of anthropological research into root causes (based on a trail of letters with reports from meetings); nevertheless, as staff goes on strike in 3 days, it’s important to set the record straight and show whose fault it is. Representation of the staff (union and the Central Staff Committee) was far more than courteous and open-armed; Campinos really had an opportunity to rescue the EPO, but he chose censorship, grift and naked corruption instead.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

This post is also available in Gemini over at:

gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2020/12/12/open-letter-working-group-and-performance-assessment/

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 18/5/2021: Steam Console and OpenPrinting Developing Upstream CUPS

    Links for the day



  2. Video and Transcript of Julia Reda's LibrePlanet Keynote Talk

    "A European Open Technology Fund: Building sustainable public funding for free software” — a talk by Julia Reda; transcribed by Techrights associate and ripped by Linux Reviews



  3. Video: “Unjust Computing Clamps Down” by Richard Stallman

    12 days ago the FSF uploaded the video above, in which current threats to software freedom are explained by the FSF's founder



  4. FSF Web Site Now Lists the Seven Voting Members, Including Alexandre Oliva, Former Acting FSF President

    The FSF is now in good and reliable hands, which we're told are all supportive of the decision to bring back the FSF's founder to the Board; Oliva remains involved as a voting member



  5. The EPO's War on Justice and Assault on the Law -- Part 11: The Rapporteur Who Once Was Vice-President

    EPO‘s former Vice-President of DG3 will be the person to decide on the EPO’s (mis)conduct



  6. [Meme] Captured EPO

    Put the EPO back in the hands of people who do all the work and actually understand the real goals of a patent office



  7. An Urgent Need to Fix the EPO, Which is Becoming Rogue at Every Level (Even the 'Legal' Level)

    Helpless examiners are being put in a grave dilemma: violate the EPC or lose the job; it's meanwhile clear that internal appeals, including referrals to the Boards of Appeal, are also hopeless because these courts or tribunals obey tyrants, not the EPC, and moreover they cover up past abuses of the tyrants



  8. IRC Proceedings: Monday, May 17, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, May 17, 2021



  9. 6,700 Signatures in Support of Richard Stallman's Return to the FSF's Board

    6,700 signatures will be secured any day now (maybe later today); we thought the graph is worth replotting again, even if only to remind people how badly the defamatory hate letter has backfired



  10. [Meme] The Real Gates Scandal is About Connections to Sex Trafficking (Epstein), Not Infidelity

    Some media is still trying to shift attention (some of the very same media that misdirected focus to Richard Stallman when a Gates-Epstein scandal unfolded at MIT), but people aren't gullible enough



  11. Links 17/5/2021: New GeckoLinux and Kdenlive 21.04.1

    Links for the day



  12. Richard Stallman Refers to Intel's Management Engine (ME) -- or a Back Door -- as 'Master', and the Processor Intel Lets Us Use as 'Slave'

    “The president and founder of the Free Software Foundation will speak about pressing issues in free software today, and will present the winners of the 2018 Free Software Awards,” says the summary (this was 3 years ago, i.e. before the purge of language, with a prominent role played by Intel)



  13. Links 17/5/2021: NetBSD 9.2 and Early Look at Bodhi Linux 6.0.0

    Links for the day



  14. Calle Josefsson as Living Proof That Attacking the Causes You Once Proclaimed to Stand for is Very Profitable

    Some thoughts on the situation of the Boards of Appeal in Haar; they're led by someone who receives a huge salary (a four- or five-fold increase) in exchange for an epic sellout and abandonment of principles; as a de facto legal slinger or imposter/poser he has already done incredible damage on several levels



  15. The EPO's War on Justice and Assault on the Law -- Part 10: A Faustian Pact?

    Benoît Battistelli‘s rubber-stamping judge from Sweden saw his salary growing four- or five-fold and he has meanwhile lowered his public profile, fearing that people will see what he sold his soul for



  16. EPO Staff Representatives Not Amused to See an Office That Steals From Staff and Even From Pensioners

    The heist continues; the EPO isn't just a milking cow of Germany but also of EPO officials who keep the 'lid' or the 'cover' on this whole financial instrument, which would enrage member states if they truly understood what's going on



  17. [Meme] Virtual Prisons for Virtual Hearings (Haarings)

    Today’s EPO has a truly twisted notion of the “rule of law”



  18. President of the Boards of Appeal, the Star of the Haar Show

    It’s best in the metal version; burn in Hell, Lesley Gore



  19. Right To Repair: When You Don't Own What You Buy (and Cannot Even Repair It Legally)

    The second part of preliminary background regarding the Right To Repair; our associate who extracted the videos from YouTube says that both are relevant to “Freedom 0″ (as per the FSF’s definition of Free software)



  20. Right To Repair: What It's About and How That Relates to Software

    A short (less than one minute) video that offers some background or sheds light on the intersection between Software Freedom and the Right To Repair



  21. Brand as Distraction From the Core Issues Surrounding the Right To Repair

    Excerpt of a video from Odysee, in which an important point is explained regarding a very actual and relevant case, more so given a recent ruling that indirectly impacts software freedom, mostly in (but not limited to) the United States



  22. Virtual 'Courts' Aren't Courts and Aren't Suitable Substitutes, Either

    The cheapening of the concept of justice, even as the pandemic that serves to justify that cheapening is gradually being brought under control, is the real issue that should be debated in Haar (or from private homes, probably somewhere around Haar); whether it's compulsory or not ought to be a side question



  23. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, May 16, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, May 16, 2021



  24. Links 17/5/2021: Linux 5.13 RC2 and a Lot About Patents

    Links for the day



  25. (All-Time) Archive of Techrights Videos Contains About 1,000 Videos, All Listed in One Place Now

    We're improving access to old material in the site and right now the focus is ways to improve discovery of old video/multimedia files



  26. Haar Song

    The Office in Munich is overseen by “a municipality near Munich,” according to Wikipedia (not inside Munich, so that in itself is a violation of the EPC)



  27. The EPO's War on Justice and Assault on the Law -- Part 9: Squeezing Out the Lifeblood of Democracy?

    The lack of public discourse at the EPO (where tyrants like Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos make up the rules and then have them rubber-stamped by kangaroo courts) helps explain an atrocious policy and moral abyss, which recently led to acceptance of European software patents and mass surveillance disguised as “access to justice”



  28. Luke Smith on Why Free Software Matters and 'Open Source' is Meaningless

    A video just released by a popular YouTube channel



  29. Links 16/5/2021: ExTiX 21.5, Drumstick Multiplatform MIDI File Player Refresh

    Links for the day



  30. EPO.org is a Really Awful Source of Information

    The site that bears a .org suffix is actually more like a private corporation lying about itself in order to save face and attract more money -- or in other words funds that will be squandered and stolen by corrupt administrators


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts