epo-1-1
EPO headquarters in Munich
7 December 2015Patents

WIPR survey: Readers vent anger at EPO dispute

More than 95% of WIPR readers are concerned by the continuing dispute at the European Patent Office (EPO), our most recent survey has revealed.

For many months now there has been a battle between the office’s management and some staff members. Last month, three members of the EPO’s union, the Staff Union of the European Patent Office, were suspended pending an investigation. This was quickly followed by two demonstrations held last week in The Hague and Munich.

For last week’s survey we asked for your views on the controversial topic. First, we asked whether you were concerned by events and, second, to explain the reasons for your views.

The results showed that 96% of respondents have concerns.

One of the clear worries centred on the effect that the continued dispute will have on the quality of examination, and there were also questions raised about president Benoît Battistelli’s management style and the autonomy of the office’s boards of appeal.

Some of the comments we received are included below with the EPO’s responses in bold.

Our question for this week’s survey is included at the end of the story.

Workload and motivation worries

Reader comment: “If, as seems likely, the dispute is causing the problems of getting through the EPO workload to be exacerbated, it’s not good for the system and not good for the applicants, especially if, as has been reported, problems at the board of appeal level simply mean that appeals—never speedy—are just not likely to be heard on a commercially useful timescale at all.”

EPO response: “Staff turnover is very low—just 2.5%. In comparable organisations this would be 5 to 10%. Applications for jobs at the EPO are up (from 10,457 in 2012 to 18,158 in 2014); we recruited 240 staff in 2014 compared with 138 in 2012.

“The EPO’s quality still rates very highly (according to a user survey in June)."

Reader comment: “The industrial dispute will lead to unmotivated staff, which will lead to worse results for inventors.”

EPO response: “The reforms have been initiated with a view to implementing a dedicated ‘quality and efficiency’ policy, which aims to control our costs through efficiency gains, so as to avoid burdening the users with fee increases, and safeguarding the recognised high quality of European patents. The new career system at the EPO supports these aims by replacing a seniority-based path by one which is built on performance and quality-related objectives.”

Reputation and quality concerns

Reader comment: “The dispute is highly damaging to the reputation of the EPO and the reputation of the quality of its examination.”

Reader comment: “Focusing on speed instead of quality is bad for the patent system. Workflows are not adapted to applicants’ needs. Pressure on examiners leads to merely formal objections instead of thorough analysis and discussion of the prior art/invention. Increasing the income of the office must not be a target for management.”

EPO response: “Quality continues to be the EPO’s highest priority. The new career system is clearly based also on individual quality objectives of each individual employee. A thorough examination process lies at the heart of the EPO’s dedicated quality policy, and is being supported by dedicated elements of the reform process, in particular the IT roadmap, which aims to equip the EPO with the most advanced IT tools.

“The target is to manage costs at the EPO prudently. Unlike almost all public sector bodies, the EPO is not funded by the taxpayer, but rather is wholly self-financing from the fees paid for patents and applications. However, costs are growing at a marginally faster rate than revenues, and in the long-term this will not be sustainable. Prudent reforms and efficiency savings now will ensure the continued viability and independence of the EPO.”

Management criticisms

Reader comment: “The EPO management’s push for higher productivity without keeping the examiners motivated will lead to, at best, a regime of quantity over quality, which is a step backwards and negative for the industry.”

Reader comment: “While it may be that EPO staff are well paid and enjoy tax-free UN status, and there is a serious need for the EPO to reduce examination and opposition pendency, it is quite clear that the president’s management style is inappropriate. No management can be considered effective if it alienates so many of its staff that 2,000 are prepared to come out and demonstrate. It is disgraceful that the Administrative Council members have failed to hold the president to proper account.”

EPO response: “The last five years have seen our most ambitious programme of reforms to date. A lot has changed and it has not always been easy, but we are well on the way to securing the long-term future of our workplace.

“The performance of the office as a whole is indicative of wellbeing of the staff: production is up at least 9% in 2015 compared with 2 to 3% annual productivity improvements in previous years; all the while quality still is rated very high.”

Reader comment: “Regardless of the need for the reforms that the EPO management is trying to implement, it is clear that a toxic environment has developed with the organisation. This demonstrates a complete failure by those responsible to manage change effectively. Meanwhile, quality of examination must surely suffer.”

Reader comment: “The situation is becoming more and more worrying and chaotic. Three staff representatives have been suspended for dubious reasons, and at least another one has become a target. Battistelli dislikes constructive talks and dissenting opinions. Immune from jurisdiction, he does not respect fundamental rights and international labour law standards. There is even a job offer for a forensic specialist to support his internal police (investigation unit) in his war against staff.”

EPO response: “The president started the social democracy reform, including the social dialogue. It is a social dialogue with all internal stakeholders (managers, staff representatives, and staff members) set up to create the working climate needed to achieve our mission.

“To ensure a fruitful social dialogue at the EPO, we are implementing basic principles, such as direct election of the staff representatives by the employees through harmonised and transparent rules, representation at central and local level, and fair representation and proportion of grades and sites.”

Boards of appeal

Reader comment: “It is clear that there must be a complete separation between the EPO and the boards of appeal. The dictatorial approach of the current president of the EPO is not acceptable.”

EPO response: “A structural reform of the appeals system of the EPO is under way. It aims at strengthening the organisational and management-related autonomy of the boards of appeal, and to enhance the perception of their independence and performance. A first user consultation on the proposed reform has been conducted, and the results have been published. They show a clear backing of the proposal made.”

For this week’s survey we ask: “Last week the Federal Circuit ruled that the inter partes review process  does not violate the Seventh Amendment. Do you think the process is too challenger-friendly?”

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Patents
18 November 2015   The European Patent Office (EPO) has reportedly suspended members of its workforce today, including leaders of the Munich-based branch of the office’s staff union, WIPR has learned.
Patents
1 December 2015   Certain staff members at the European Patent Office will stage two demonstrations this week to protest against what the office’s union has called “persistent attacks” on staff representatives.