Need a change? Well, the Euro Patent Office needs a new president... The European Patent Office has formally advertised for a new president, marking a cut-off date for its controversial president Benoit Battistelli. The news comes as bittersweet relief to staff at the EPO, who have gone on strike twice in the past week over the latest set of reform efforts pushed by Battistelli and approved by …
and made himself president for life? He certainly seems to be slipping up.
Those staff that remain will certainly cheer when he leaves office. But where will he go then? What other bunch of unlucky Eurocrats will he wreak havoc on next? President of the Commission perhaps?
I know he's claiming that as it's an international organisation, they're immune from local laws, but that's bollocks right? Surely any organisation has to adhere to the labour laws of the country they're employing people in?
I suppose they can just refuse to pay up even if an employment tribunal finds them guilty of (eg) withholding pay.
The EPO is a bit of a weird one in that all countries participating agreed that it would remain outside the jurisdiction of one specific country, lest it give the country the EPO settled in some form of legislative control over the organisation, possibly forcing it to rule in it's favour. This means the EPO staff does not fall under Dutch labour laws. This has already been tested in court.
Given the support Batistelli seems to have in the higher levels of management (these latest approved "reforms" are again a blatant power grab and method to silence critics) I doubt things will improve with a new president. The only way they are ever going to fix this is for the new president to immediately throw out all this bullshit Batistelli put in place and put some proper independent oversight comittees in place. Otherwise they'll just be swapping "Great Leader" for "Dear Leader".
It would be nice to think so, but the European Institutions have effective and legal immunity from such mundane things as local laws.
In Luxembourg, there are many EU Institutions and many, many eurocrats working in them. I will not go into listing the various advantages these people have (special tax-free supermarkets, no income tax, . . .), but a few years ago there was a review of hiring policy and now EU Institutions in Luxembourg are offering new entry-level positions at less than than the Luxembourg Minimum Wage index.
Nothing can be done against that by the Luxembourg government.
Anon for obvious reasons.
I'm not going to defend the European Institutions laws / staff rules - I will remark though that all of these Institutions mandates are created and approved by each of the Member States Governments - its therefore also a national responsibility to correct things if they are not fit for purpose! In the case of ridding the IPO, which is not an EU Institution, of its leader it seems the same is true. With the exception of a few honorable exceptions the responsible administrations are not living up what I would expect their electorates to demand from them.
Also its incorrect to say that EU bureaucrats don't pay tax - they don't pay tax in the Member State they work in but they do pay an EU income tax - http://ec.europa.eu/civil_service/job/official/index_en.htm. However, in the case of the IPO which is not an EU entity, it may be that no income tax is paid.
It's like FIFA. There are a large number of member states which can be (and were) bribed and threatened into compliance with the President's agenda. Yes, a few member states may have objected but they are vastly outnumbered by the others. FIFA wrongdoing was eventually exposed because football is interesting to the press. International civil servants are not, and are often caricatured as "privileged". Yes, they are well paid, but many politicians, academics, consultant physicians, business people, lawyers, etc etc are paid even better (even after tax), can live in their home countries and enjoy the protection of their laws and of human rights treaties to which their country is a signatory. No-one would suggest that at a certain level of pay they have been bought out of the protection of the law, would they? But this is implicit in many comments about the plight of employees of the EPO and other IOs.
Sounds like a great job - good salary/benefits and almost unlimited power so I can't be fired if I don't actually do any work so instead of working I can regularly berate people for no reason.
Trump has the above job in the US until 2020, but the EPO job opens up sooner, has fewer checks and balances than the US President and probably pays more too! As a bonus instead of fighting the NYT and CNN I'd only have to worry about El Reg.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
