back to article European Patent Office heads rapidly toward full meltdown

The European Patent Office (EPO) is heading toward a full meltdown, with its president reportedly refusing to accept an official censure over his recent actions. A leaked version of a letter from the board of the EPO's Administrative Council (B28) highlights the depths to which the organization's relationship with its …

  1. cmannett85

    There's an excellent write up on Ars on just how mental "EPOnia" is: http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/02/welcome-to-eponia-the-strange-land-of-european-patents-that-is-outside-the-law/

    1. Gene Cash Silver badge

      Wait... the EPO is its own f-cking country?? WTF?

      And I thought the USPTO was screwed up...

      We need a "completely gobsmacked" icon.

      1. Mark 85

        @Gene Cash

        +1 I was thinking the same thing. I'm glad someone else thought it too.

      2. maffski

        @Gene Cash

        It actually makes sense, as it stops any nation being able to exert greater influence over the organisation. For example would an American be happy with a patent office under Canadian control?

        1. chivo243 Silver badge

          Re: @Gene Cash

          actually it costs lots of money to file a patent, a LOT, a shed load if you will. The missus worked there and explained how much cash a NPO makes... No wonder they had cash for covert operations etc. It costs a lot of money to patent your product in all the Patent Offices. Many inventors can barely afford a patent in one office.

          So, happiness boils down to where you can afford to patent your idea\product.

      3. JohnG

        "Wait... the EPO is its own f-cking country?? WTF?"

        This is the case for most intra-governmental organisations. To avoid undue interference from the country (or countries) where they have offices, they are treated rather like embassies. Authorities from the local country (police, tax/customs officials, etc.) are not allowed on the territory of the organisation, unless with permission from the director general or governing council. The director general usually has full diplomatic immunity, while other staff members typically have partial immunity (which includes immunity from local taxation and privacy in their financial affairs).

        You may recall that Dominique Strauss-Kahn (at the time, head of the IMF) tried to claim diplomatic immunity when he was arrested in NY (the police chose to ignore it).

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Battistelli started in 2010 and his term ends in 2018. Soon after he arrived at the patent office, he embarked on a campaign to modernize the organization by getting rid of outdated work practices like fixed wage rises and promotions tied to seniority rather than performance."

      Give him a job at London Underground ASAP. The sooner all those ridiculously overpaid drivers are replaced with computers, the better. He sounds just the man for the job.

  2. x 7

    from your review one gets the impression that Batistelli is the lone voice of sanity and modernity trying to drag the Patent Office out of its historic labyrinthine mustiness, crustiness, confusion and incompetence in the face of Luddite unionists.

    Is that a fair assessment or should we disregard the spin that seems to be in place?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Whatever the truth may be, it couldn't possibly be worse than the US Patent Office.

    2. TonyK

      I wonder if you read the same article as me? The impression I got was that Battistelli is a megalomaniac. I thought the article did an excellent job of stating the facts and letting us draw our own conclusions.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        The article was a little schizophrenic so it left me uncertain as to who was the problem - so I agree with both of you Battistelli is both a voice of sanity and a little megalomaniac, however it does also seem that he isn't the only one who has some strange ideas...

        1. Number6

          My view flipped back and forth a bit through the article. I think I'm left with the impression that he's got the right idea but his people management skills are a bit lacking. Also, that the unions involved might not look out of place in 1970s Britain.

        2. Notas Badoff

          Means and goals

          Was reading yesterday about Taft the American president, who later was Taft the Supreme Court Chief Justice. One comment about him was on the order of questioning how anyone who could be so unsuccessful as a president could then turn out to be an excellent Supreme Court member/leader.

          Individual people can be entirely unfit for particular positions. You can have praiseworthy goals, but if you care not about the existing organizational dynamics and politics, those goals will sink out of sight while everything becomes about _you_ (at least as the opposition will frame it).

          Focus on people as the means to any goal. Forget about them and you can forget your goals!

        3. kierenmccarthy

          By schizophrenic...

          ... do you mean "balanced"?

          The article presents both sides of the argument. That's usually seen as a good idea.

          Kieren

          1. Sirius Lee

            Re: By schizophrenic...

            "The article presents both sides of the argument."

            I beg to differ. It certainly presents perspectives from both sides but that alone does not constitute balance. An organization like the EPO is not going to pitch up one day and decide to take employment action against staff for no good reason.

            If the EPO has been under-performing, and seems from other El Reg comments that it has, one possible reason is because the staff are under-performing or unwilling to accept new practices that allow them to perform better. No doubt the leaders of any such resistance would be those involved in the union. So if the EPO needs to be reformed and staff working practices need to be reformed and there is resistance some action needs to be taken. And presumably after considerable consultation.

            But none of this type of history is apparent from the article. Instead it is presented as the President is the guilty party. Did the EPO President just decide to persecute some union supporting members of staff? If so, he deserves the censure but it seem unlikely that's the way it has played out not least because the executive will be staffed with capable HR types.

            In the meantime, it seems very likely the union has co-opted its friends on the left of politics in the EU so take positions on the board so they can take the line they have.

            The article make no constructive alternative suggestions so appears to me, a complete outsider, that the author could also be part of the campaign against the EPO president.

    3. TheVogon

      "Is that a fair assessment"

      Yes.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Some facts

      As a long-time employee of the EPO, I would agree that some change was needed, but not the wholesale changes that we have seen. There was certainly no need to do it with the blatant hostility in which the President (BB) has approached the task.

      What BB has been very clever about has been keeping secret the REALLY negative changes that he has introduced. For example:

      * Examiner targets have increased by an average of 20% in the last 2 years; this is both disrespectful of the work that is done, shows very little understanding of the nature of the work, and is unsustainable in the long term.

      * If your doctor says you are sick, and even if the in-house doctors agree, the President may decide otherwise.

      * If you become too ill to work, you are not allowed to leave your country of employment until either you have been off work for 10 years, or have reached the age of 55. Also, during this period, you are effectively under house-arrest, as you MUST be at home between 10 and 12, and 2 and 4, just in case they decide to check up on you. Going away/on holiday requires explicit permission from the Office.

      * The Investigative Unit (IU, in house Gestapo-like organisation, supported by an external British counter-terrorism company) listens to everything, or at least we suspect that they do. No-one says anything "risky" by phone or email, just in case.

      * If you are under investigation, you are compelled to cooperate, and may tell NO-ONE that you are being investigated. However, the Office may decide to "leak" information to tame press organisations, if it suits them. Once the investigation concludes (or even before), there is a hearing, where the person being investigated has no legal support. The President may ignore the conclusions of the disciplinary commitee (he invariably does) and impose a harsher sanction than recommended; in this regard, the President and his henchwoman, the head of HR (Elodie Bergot, PD4.3), is judge, jury and executioner. There is no legal recourse, apart from a lengthy 8-10 year wait before a case is heard at the ILO in Switzerland.

      * Funnily enough, EVERYONE targeted and punished by the IU so far has been a staff/Union rep, despite it having been set up to investigate fraud and harrassment.

      * The lower court in Holland told the EPO that they must not prevent the Union from being able to operate within the Office, but the EPO just said "hey, we're the EPO", and proceeded to ignore it. A higher court has heard the case, and is currently mulling over what it has heard. It doesn't matter, because VP1 has said publicly that EPO will ignore any decision taken by the courts. The next stop will be the European Court of Human Rights.

      * After all this, the Administrative Council (AC) has finally decided to act, less than a year after extending BB's mandate. Board 28 now intends to send a letter to the AC, in which BB will be censured for his lack of cooperation, and for having specifically ignored instructions from the AC. To "support" BB, an incredibly badly-written letter has been sent from VP1's office, which all Principal Directors and Directors have been "invited" to sign. In this letter, it is stated that management and staff are committed to the changes introduced by BB, which is a joke. To their credit, it appears that very few PDs and Directors are prepared to sign this piece of toilet-paper. This effectively amounts to a vote of no confidence in VP1, who has most definitely not covered himself in glory in recent months and is looking increasingly out-of-touch.

      Sorry to go on for so long, but these are issues that I felt worth pointing out, as they have been glossed over in many of the articles published recently. I guess fundamentally the question is, is an International Organisation like the EPO able to take away all of your human rights, simply because the pay more than average? Logically, the answer is no, but it may take a while before the exact limits of the EPO's immunity is established.

  3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    Anyone else hearing "I want a recount, and a car with really shi**y gas mileage

    and I want a recount

    And then I want my old job back."

    I think you know who this needs.

  4. Someone Else Silver badge
    Coat

    Battistelli sounds a lot like our Governor.

    For those of you who read this august forum regularly, you might be able to determine which state's Governor I'm referring to. But if you can't, simply choose a state at random, and you have a better than 50-50 chance of choosing correctly.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "simply choose a state at random"

      Presumably from a choice of Schrödinger vs. Dirac vs. Heisenberg ?

  5. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

    Hey, patent office clerks need time for their own scientific projects... BTW, how is the Swiss patent office doing?

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Outdated practices?

    "getting rid of outdated work practices like fixed wage rises"

    Really? Surely you mean "screwing the workers who had signed up at a low rate of pay expecting that if they stuck with the organization their loyalty would be rewarded by climbing the pay scale ladder one step a year, by telling them that tough shit, I'm the new boss and I'm going to keep your wages low, and never mind that it isn't what you signed up for when you joined."

    It's worth nothing that Mrs T didn't put an end to that sort of thing in the UK, be it in local government or universities, or... Maybe she saw that it was a fair deal for all?

    1. Rol

      Re: Outdated practices?

      "Lemon Ice-cream"

      "No!"

      "Oh, come on! It sounds fair enough to me."

      "No! Not the recipe for Lemon Ice-cream"

      "Come on.."

      "No! Never never never!!!!"

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amZsdpLXcIo

      NTNON

    2. imanidiot Silver badge

      Re: Outdated practices?

      On the other hand it leads to the situation where the 58 year old fart in the IT office is so incompetent he can't do ANY work anymore as he hasn't bothered keeping up with modern coding practices and just doesn't understand anymore gets paid 4 times as much as the highly motivated young'uns even though he doesn't do shit. Yet he still gets his pay raise every year.

      (I know of someone like that in exactly that position. The most useful thing he does is bugger off to make fresh soup every day at lunchtime. Yet he gets paid double what his manager gets)

      1. Awil Onmearse

        Re: Outdated practices?

        "On the other hand it leads to the situation where the 58 year old fart in the IT office is so incompetent...."

        ... according to generation after generation of pimply-faced, over-confident wankers who arrive waving their cocks around, are doomed to fail in exactly the same ways as each previous generation, and simultaneously dismiss the voice of experience as incompetence.

        1. imanidiot Silver badge

          Re: Outdated practices?

          ... according to generation after generation of pimply-faced, over-confident wankers who arrive waving their cocks around, are doomed to fail in exactly the same ways as each previous generation, and simultaneously dismiss the voice of experience as incompetence.

          Nope, in case of the example I know even by admittance of the guy himself ("Oh, I'm just too old to keep up with all that stuff, I just don't get it" Even after repeated attempts to explain things and even offers to send him to some training courses). I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of overconfident cockwavers around, but there are also plenty of incompetent old farts hired long ago that haven't bothered keeping up.

          There is a difference between doing things the way you know to be the best way out of experience and doing things the way you think they should be done "because thats how you've always done it". If you can't explain WHY your method is better then maybe you should consider what someone is saying when they try to convince you otherwise.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Outdated practices?

            Where I worked there was a long-standing policy that at age 50 most IT guys got a generous pay-off and immediate pension. Having planned on that I was seriously pissed when a new IT director arrived and said "Why are we paying vast sums to get rid of our most experienced IT experts" and moved the goal post to 60 - at which age no pay-off, just the pension. To add insult to injury, started paying an annual bonus instead of a pay rise and tried to make out that there was no difference... and then made the bonus "performance related" so the lucky few cronies got a massive bonus everyone else bugger all.

      2. fajensen
        Trollface

        Re: Outdated practices?

        On the other hand it leads to the situation ...

        Come On -Those "Bright Young Things" need to have something to look forward to other than working minimum wage 80 hours a day for their entire "career" - which is the reality today.

        The old fart shows that the company "cares", there is a career rack and that loyalty is rewarded (as if!). That's why he is paid.

        For many colleagues "Retired" just means "Having officially declared the intention of not doing any useful work". Which is *still* better than ambitiously turning out impressive kilo-line numbers of garbage - which is also the stark reality today. Especially web-developers, they are never done until the site doesn't work any more. People should learn from the Pharaohs, I say!

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Outdated practices?

        The issues of "changing the contract so that staff get a worse pay deal than they originally signed up for" is different to "not being able to get rid of incompetent employees".

        Really, the two issues are totally unrelated. This bloke at the EPO has wound up his staff by foisting a contract change on them which results in them ending up with worse pay than they originally contracted for. That's got nothing to do with whether or not the organisation gets rid of employees no longer up to the job.

        (And I can't think of any valid excuse for automatic promotions)

        One thing to think about: this business of pay scale ladders is standard in UK universities. Thing is, if you keep your position as a UK university academic, you're almost certainly proving year on year that you're developing your skills and keeping up to date with changes, because if you don't do that, you fail the multitude of inspections and audits you're subjected to, which does your career no good at all. Even professors get audited, although in their case it's generally nigh on impossible to get rid of 'em if they don't show good.

  7. Potemkine Silver badge

    Enarques like Mr. Battistelli are PITA.

    Being persuaded to be the 8th wonder of the World, they don't give a f*ck about people, what they want it to exert power and impose their will.

  8. Oh Homer
    Mushroom

    The Sovereign Nation of Eponia?

    So Batistelli is a greedy megalomaniac, or in other words fairly typical of any upper management.

    I'm more concerned with the fact that, apparently, the EPO has sovereignty.

    It's bad enough that businesses are considered legal entities with rights supposedly comparable to humans, but when a business whose sole purpose is doling out corporate welfare, in the form of state enforced monopolies, is declared to be its own sovereign nation, above the law and beyond the jurisdiction of those actual sovereign nations it subjugates, that is when the megalomaniacal character of its autocratic ruler becomes a serious political issue.

    What next? Will the EPO establish its own military, armed by Lockheed Martin, and conduct "training exercises" over various European borders?

    On the other hand, the good news is that, under the terms of UN Security Council resolutions, we can in fact make a legal declaration of war against the EPO, and then bomb it into oblivion, where it belongs.

    1. fritsd

      Re: The Sovereign Nation of Eponia?

      Fine, we'll let the patent office of the EPO signatory nation of Albania handle it all, then. I'm sure France, Germany and the UK would be OK with that. Right?

      1. Oh Homer
        Mushroom

        Re: "let the nation of Albania handle it all"

        Why should anyone other than a sovereign nation's own government be allowed to "handle" anything in particular affecting that nation?

        Want your dodgy "patents" enforced in the UK? Then register them (and have them scrutinised and approved - or rejected) in the UK.

        Why should some foreign nation's unelected quangos have any jurisdiction whatsoever over this country, regardless of whether it's a real nation or some fictional micro-nation?

        1. fajensen
          Angel

          Re: "let the nation of Albania handle it all"

          Why should some foreign nation's unelected quangos have any jurisdiction whatsoever over this country

          Because you have to give them exactly the same rights as British unelected quangos - can't discriminate on nationality, remember?

          1. Oh Homer
            Headmaster

            Re: "the same rights as British unelected quangos"

            This is a circular argument, since the same principle applies to our unelected quangos, who should rightfully have no authority over other sovereign nations (or anyone else, frankly).

    2. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      Re: "businesses are considered legal entities with rights supposedly comparable to humans"

      In the US, not Europe.

      Yet.

      1. Oh Homer
        Holmes

        Re: "In the US, not Europe"

        Sadly the travesty of corporate personhood has been firmly established in British law for a very long time.

        "In the Salomon v Salomon (1897), the House of Lords held that once a company is incorporated in UK law, it has a separate legal existence to the members of the company and the company to be treated like any other independent individual."

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The higher the baboon climbs up the tree...

    ... the more you can see of its arse

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like