Further Transparency Problems at the EPO

posted by Roy Schestowitz on Sep 08, 2026

Published yesterday: EPO Hiding Cocainegate and Abandoning Transparency (Even Access to Very Basic Information is Denied)

Two Fridays ago the representatives of EPO staff or the Central Staff Committee wrote and then shared an "open letter" (open for staff to see) addressed to the President, who is not elected per se, he's just appointed owing to nepotism and corruption. The predecessor took away permanent contracts from lots of employees, then the latest dictator reduced their compensation. This is what the representatives wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

The Central Staff Committee (CSC) have written an open letter to the President to request additional information regarding the recent communication on fixed-term contracts. The Office announce that the annual review led to 18 colleagues being converted to a permanent appointment and 128 receiving an extension for a second five-year term. However, greater transparency regarding the full scope of decisions made, both positive and negative, would provide important reassurance to the large number of fixed-term colleagues trying to understand their own future prospects.

These decisions have an exceptionally important impact on the colleagues concerned. Staff may spend up to ten years working for the Organisation without knowing whether they will ultimately be offered stable employment. During that period colleagues build their careers and lives around the EPO, often after relocating internationally together with their families. A decision not to extend or convert can therefore have consequences extending far beyond the employment relationship itself. Moreover, after five to ten years, the experience gained becomes increasingly niche and less transferable outside the Office, while advancing age can create more barriers for colleagues if they must seek work elsewhere.

Where colleagues face such prolonged job precarity, a transparent, predictable and evenly applied procedure is a relatively small but meaningful way for the Organisation to demonstrate respect for their commitment and contribution to the Office.

Read more in the open letter.

The letter is dated a day earlier (Thursday) and it enumerates issues/questions:

European Patent Office
80298 Munich
Germany

Central Staff Committee
Comité central du personnel
Zentraler Personalausschuss

centralSTCOM@epo.org

Reference: sc26063cl

Date: 27/08/2026

European Patent Office | 80298 MUNICH | GERMANY

To: Mr António Campinos (President of the EPO)
Cc: Social Dialogue

By email:
To: president@epo.org
Cc: socialdialogue@epo.org

OPEN LETTER

Request for transparency in the conversion from fixed-term to permanent contracts

Dear Mr President,

We refer to the recent Office communication concerning this year's review of fixed-term appointments under Circular 405. According to the communication, 18 eligible colleagues were converted to permanent appointments, while a further 128 received an extension of their fixed- term appointments.

We welcome every conversion to permanent employment and congratulate the colleagues concerned. At the same time, the announcement has understandably raised questions among fixed-term colleagues about how the 18 conversions were selected.

Since 1 April 2018, fixed-term appointments became the only basis on which new staff were recruited. According to Circular 405, the Office conducts the extension and conversion exercise once annually, which we understand happens during summer. With decisions required to be communicated at least 12 months before the end of an appointment, the first colleagues who joined the Office under the new employment framework are now entering the conversion process.

Circular 405 describes its procedure as a “proactive, standard and transparent process” intended to give employees “greater clarity about their future prospects at the EPO”. It establishes a pattern of an initial five-year appointment, an extension for another five years and then conversion into permanent employment. Article 1(4), however, also

---

allows the President to convert appointments before ten years of continuous service have elapsed.

The recent announcement lacks information to understand whether the 18 conversions correspond to a defined recruitment cohort approaching the normal point for conversion, or whether some concern earlier discretionary conversions.

We would therefore appreciate clarification on the following:

1. What was the recruitment-date range of the colleagues considered for conversion in this year's annual exercise? In particular, did it extend to before 1 April 2018?

2. How many colleagues were considered in this exercise and what were their outcomes? Please provide the numbers converted to permanent employment, extended, and whose appointments ended without extension after five years, and without conversion after ten years.

3. Were any of the 18 colleagues converted under Article 1(4) before reaching the normal point for conversion? If so, how many and according to which objective criteria were these early conversions decided?

4. What is the distribution of the 18 conversions by DG and job group? In particular, how many concern examiners, administrative staff, lawyers and management functions?

5. For the colleagues who did not have their contract extended or converted after 5 and 10 years respectively, what criteria were applied in making these decisions? In particular, how was the “needs of the service” criterion applied in practice and how was consistency ensured between different functions and organisational units?

We would therefore appreciate receiving the information requested above in an anonymised form, fully respecting the privacy of the individual colleagues concerned.

Sincerely yours,

Derek Kelly
Chairman of the Central Staff Committee

To people in the European workforce some of the questions above may seem both relevant and applicable.

The EPO does not experience a lack of income, it's just growing greed.

The EPO was never meant to be profitable. █