EPO: consultation on Strategic Plan 2023, social tensions remain

search-result-placeholder.jpg

The EPO has opened a public consultation to get input for its Strategic Plan 2023, which will outline the vision for the Office. ‘Its implementation will ensure that we continue to provide high-quality patent services that encourage innovation and contribute to growth.’

Input can be sent in on 15 March 2019 at the latest by filling out the contribution template. The consultation is focused on three topics: 1) Evolution of the patent system and future challenges; 2) Delivering high quality products and services; 3) Social responsibility and transparency. The final proposal for the Strategic Plan 2023 will be submitted to the Administrative Council for adoption in June 2019 and the approved version will be published on the EPO website.

Image
logo-epo
It is interesting to read the description of the third topic, ‘social responsibility and transparency’, in the contribution template. Input is welcome about the EPO’s responsibility towards the outside world: ‘As a public institution, the EPO has a duty to ensure that not only its stakeholders but the public in general are well informed about the activities of the Office and the way they are conducted. (…) Moreover, the EPO sees itself as being part of a wider eco-system, in which its activities have an impact on the economy and the environment. (…).’

The consultation is apparently not about internal social issues, although there are many signs (reported about by this blog here and here) that despite changes for the better, the climate of distrust and fear has not disappeared since António Campinos succeeded Benoît Battistelli as EPO president last year.

As JUVE Patent reported in an article about the EPO last week: ‘The fact no insiders and even some external patent attorneys (…) did not want to be named indicates the depth of mistrust towards EPO management in some parts of the workforce.’ According to JUVE Patent, criticism ‘is focused particularly on Principal Director for Human Resources, Elodie Bergot. She is regarded as a key figure in the long-running dispute between the old EPO leadership and parts of the workforce (…). “As long as she is in office, everyone is afraid to express themselves publicly and nothing changes in the atmosphere of the house”, JUVE Patent quoted an insider. It also wrote that the three new vice presidents Nellie Simon, Christoph Ernst and Stephen Rowan, who were elected last October and started in office on 1 January 2019, might be able to change things for the better.

A letter from the Central Staff Committee, in the meantime, shows that EPO president Campinos’ listening to the staff has certainly not always led to improvements for EPO employees. The CSC sent a letter to Campinos last Friday about the ‘very inconsiderate treatment’ of several colleagues and about 'chaotic' HR management. Staff are seen as, and treated like a faceless commodity – just like pawns on a check-board.

Departmental reorganisations allegedly necessitating multiple sequential transfers in a very short period are proposals which concern ‘the conditions of employment of the whole or part of staff’ (Article 38(2) first bullet ServRegs) and should have been subject to GCC consultation. We consider the non consultation of the GCC when staff is so affected to be, at the very least, a breach of the Service Regulations, but more importantly, a failing of the duty of care that the Office has to its staff. Neither the CSC, nor the affected staff, has been consulted in any way. The treatment which the affected staff members are receiving at present – if maintained – would constitute a new low in staff/management relations. And this is happening at a time when we had finally hoped to see an improvement.

We are taken aback by the total absence of “Fingerspitzengefühl” in the approach to the colleagues. The heavy-handed style of communication merely breeds distress and demotivation, and we have been confronted with several of our colleagues in tears.

Comments (14)
Your email address will not be published.
default-avatar.png
Shame on Campinos
January 27, 2019 AT 6:48 PM

Many thanks for reporting to the Public what happens at EPO. EPO HR practices have indeed not changed an inch since arrival of Mr Campinos (he is said to have absolutely no empathy towards "joe-average" staff members' issues behind closed doors and he only wants to be seen as a "friendly and accessible chef" in Public). He lets Bergot run the shop and she does it with her usual level of incompetence. Forced transfers were one of the key elements found contributing to the dangerous HR organisation at France Telecom (an illustration of the duo Battistelli - Bergot's concrete achievements https://www.politico.eu/article/labor-relations-turn-toxic-in-the-european-patent-office/). Bergot is responsible for all this. Campinos finds the "new career" (which is a nightmare for staff as it not only does not reward staff for the efforts done but also attributes unhealthy incentives (focussing too much on quantity vs quality). He has not done anything concrete about the quality of the work done except pretending that he will do something soon. He has done nothing regarding Els Hardon and Laurent Prunier who are still held hostages for wrong-doings they have not committed. HE DID NOTHING since he arrived, full stop. One may expect that a new drama will for sure occur e.g. new suicide. The question is not if but when since indeed the fear factor remains the same and it is still coupled to far too high production pressure. This is depressing.

default-avatar.png
MaxDrei
January 27, 2019 AT 8:09 PM

Being an optimist, I seize on these words: "... the three new vice presidents Nellie Simon, Christoph Ernst and Stephen Rowan, who were elected last October and started in office on 1 January 2019, might be able to change things for the better." If I understand it right, Ms Simon will be Bergot's supervisor. Simon studied at the LSE. Has she got the strength to set Bergot straight? Rowan is a Brit and Ernst is a German lawyer. Suppose all three new VP's have respect for the Rule of Law. Suppose that President Campinos has been biding his time, gathering his forces and that he regards his three new VP's as "the cavalry" which will enable him to act in the cause of restoring decency within the rogue State of Eponia, and patching up its reputation in the outside world. Can we realistically hope along those lines?

default-avatar.png
Sad EPO staff response to MaxDrei
January 28, 2019 AT 1:27 AM

question MaxDrei : you sincerely place hopes in Dr Ernst ? you mean the very same Dr Ernst who supported Battistelli all along when he was violating the Rule of Law (Pr Bross was clear enough wasn't he)? Would this mean that Mr Campino alone has neither the courage or the strength or the will to instruct Mrs Bergot to behave (since obviously with the forced transfers and the continuation of her HR policies mainly based on by fear and retaliation she is not behaving) ? You must be joking!

default-avatar.png
The Convention watchdog response to MaxDrei
January 28, 2019 AT 9:54 AM

Re Max Drei's optimism: As head of the German delegation in the Administrative Council and more recently as President of the Council Mr. Ernst shares the Council's responsibility for most of the developments in the past years. In particular, this applies to the punitive actions against the Boards of Appeal following decision R 19/12, including the failed structural reform aimed at efficiency instead of true independence, the exile of the Boards outside Munich and the handling of the Corcoran case showing that a Board member can be removed from office withoiut observing the garanties laid down in Article 23 (1) EPC. Nothing has changed in this respect. Rather, getting rid of a Board member who is not welcome to the management has become much easier: Reappointment has become dependent on a positive report and which manager will write a positive report on a person responsible for decisions not following the accepted mainstream. Dont forget, the President of the Boards is not just primus inter pares as a presiding judge should be. Rather he manages the Boards as laid down in revised Rule 12a (2) of the Implementing Regulations and his own dependency on his reappointment will not encourage him to risk conflics with the President of the Office or the Council. And the President of the Office has not lost his say when it comes to reappointment of Board members (cf. Rules 12d (3), 12c (2) EPC). The doubts about the rank of the rule of law in the EPO have not disappeared with the new President and his new team of Vice Presidents.

default-avatar.png
Attentive Observer
January 28, 2019 AT 9:01 AM

Dear Max Drei, I appreciate your optimism, but I think that it is a bit out of place here. You hope that Ms Simon will put things straight, especially with Ms Bergot. When it comes to the other VP you hope that they will abide by the rule of law. But you certainly know that the law is there to be interpreted. Will they go for an interpretation which will bring social peace or will they simply continue to apply the existing regime? It is a bit early to decide which way they will take, but I fear that the status quo is more likely, as it needs the least efforts. Why would Mr Ernst start going over board at the end of his career? He is there to make a bit of money and that is it. One could also consider that the new President could want the new VP do the “dirty” job to curtail the misbehaviour of Ms Bergot, and of all the other minions brought into the EPO by the former president. If this should be the case, he is not the right man at the right place. It is primarily his duty to give the whole scene a shakeup, not to have other people under his authority to do this. It is a question of credibility. As long as the whole clique put in place by the would-be Napoleon still occupy the jobs he assigned them, the new President will not gain the confidence of his staff. All the attempts of his trying to have a direct dialogue with staff will remain a fig leaf behind which nothing will really change. Remember also one thing. By granting as quickly as possible, the contracting states have got used to get a lot of annual fees much earlier. I am not sure they will want less, and later. This is one of the vicious legacies of the former head of the EPO literally buying votes in the AC. If there is one aspect on which the contracting states are not prepared to compromise, it is money. Money will always come before social peace. I might be overly pessimistic, but this pessimism is caused by a long time of looking at how things develop at the EPO. I would very much like to be nicely surprised, as hope dies last, but I fear that it will not be the case. Techrights: FINGERS OFF!! I do not want my contributions to be used by somebody like you!

Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published.
Clear all
Become a contributor!
Interested in contributing? Submit your proposal for a blog post now and become a part of our legal community! Contact Editorial Guidelines