tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post1612373679992457662..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Further rumblings from EPO - strikes and demonstrations prohibitedVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-71192595405140860582014-07-05T16:47:49.906+01:002014-07-05T16:47:49.906+01:00Erratum
Until 2012, a "very good" or &qu...Erratum<br />Until 2012, a "very good" or "excellent" marking in QUANTITY was the key to promotionShalalala-lalanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-75736837058519697202014-07-05T16:19:12.430+01:002014-07-05T16:19:12.430+01:00The irony of those in power offering a statement s...The irony of those in power offering a statement such as "<i>opined that "responsible social dialogue" had not been engaged in.</i>"<br /><br />should not be lost on the readers (nor the owners) of this blog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-65201766522843535822014-07-05T14:45:49.902+01:002014-07-05T14:45:49.902+01:00Quality drop has a structural background.
Since de...Quality drop has a structural background.<br />Since decades, an examiner's career is determined by his bis-annual report. Four points are examined: quality of work, quantity, aptitude of the examiner and attitude in the department. Someone with four "Good" markings is assured of a very slow track.<br />What actually is counted is quantity, quantity, quantity and quantity. Until 2012, a "very good" or "excellent" marking in quality was the key to promotion (read money) and/or managerial posts. By doing so the EPO deliberately killed the traditional quality of its work, the biggest producers of crap becoming managers. In 2012, Battistelli put a stop to the promotions. Nowadays, only an "excellent" marking leaves a few hope. The consequence is predictable: some examiners now produce more that 4 times what is expected from them, while the huge majority of the other demotivated ones fight for reaching the requested target and maintain an acceptable quality level. <br />Soon will applicant miss the poor quality of yesterday. <br /> shalalala-lalanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-80060687074833916872014-06-27T20:34:22.593+01:002014-06-27T20:34:22.593+01:00Anon 25.6@ 21.54
Quality drop has a historical ba...Anon 25.6@ 21.54<br /><br />Quality drop has a historical background!<br /><br />At the introduction of BEST, EPO seriously considered closing TH site because Dutch governement was blocking the seat agreement. All the recruiting was done in MU, and many good search examiners also moved to MU. <br /><br />After 2006, with the new seat agreement, there was massive recruitment in TH, however there was nobody to train the new recruits. Many of them have with unadequate training in examination landed in MU, but because of technical shifts, their poor quality was not noticed. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-25875368856901143542014-06-27T20:30:14.082+01:002014-06-27T20:30:14.082+01:00I heard that many of those striking barristers wer...I heard that many of those striking barristers were sacked by their employers, only to be reinstated when HMRC advised that self-employed individuals cannot sack themselves.<br /><br />I have a feeling there will be no further comments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-41233855984588607802014-06-27T20:07:53.374+01:002014-06-27T20:07:53.374+01:00George, take the comments in the sarcastic manner ...George, take the comments in the sarcastic manner they are intended. Level of a sewer? No. You don't seem to mind that the blog readers have to put up with reading your self-indulgent nonsense on a daily basis. but then you are a member of the club and only club members have anything valuable to say.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-91269148494312187322014-06-26T18:54:30.308+01:002014-06-26T18:54:30.308+01:00All the UK legal profession? While ignoring the cr...All the UK legal profession? While ignoring the criminal barristers who went on strike this year? Undoubtedly you will also contend that your statement should be defined by you later the way you wish it to be defined. You must have problems with 123(2)...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-72388514555919997272014-06-26T18:33:12.671+01:002014-06-26T18:33:12.671+01:00I can see why there is an event horizon on this bl...I can see why there is an event horizon on this blog, because the higher the number of comments, the more sewer-like it gets, and the level of information concerning the real issue as indicated by the title of 18 June 2014 approximates zero. How happy I am that I do not subscribe to e-mail reminders that another comment has arrived!<br /><br />Kind regards,<br /><br /><br />George Brock-NannestadAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-20857867586385067132014-06-26T13:13:19.326+01:002014-06-26T13:13:19.326+01:00Ah! So you believe you are right based on a legal ...Ah! So you believe you are right based on a legal analysis of the wording of your response? In which case, you must construe my original statement more accurately:<br /><br />"I must accept that I will be sacked for exerting that right, however."<br /><br />You are anally (you bring our the Frenchman in me) construing the word 'for' as meaning my employer would put in writing "you are sacked for lawfully going on strike". A bit of an extreme (hence anal) construction, methinks. Most sensible/intelligent people would take a more real world/pragmatic construction view of my statement. Hell! They may even apply the principles of the Protocol on interpretation of Article 69 EPC!!!<br /><br />Such anal construction may apply in the non-real world comfy surrounding of the EPO, but out here I can assure you that such constructions are 'academic', to put it politely.<br /><br />You can rest assured that when I say "my employer will sack me for going on strike", legitimately or otherwise, I, as would many people, certainly anyone employed in the UK legal profession (plus many others) WOULD be sacked FOR going on strike.<br /><br />Your original opening statement.<br /> "Anon 1106. If you are in the UK then I suggest you do not know what you are talking about.", is evidence that you have now amended the meaning of your argument to justify your position. Suffice to say, you were talking out of your backside.<br /><br />Enjoy your EPO lunch break. I have a right to a lunch break in the UK. I must accept that I will be sacked for exerting that right, however. Possibly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-31445960739242720442014-06-26T11:37:58.937+01:002014-06-26T11:37:58.937+01:00Anon 0913,
Why the obsession with bottoms?
To retu...Anon 0913,<br />Why the obsession with bottoms?<br />To return to the point... You started by stating 'I have the right to strike. I must accept that I will be sacked for exerting that right, however.' I pointed out that that statement is wrong. Your argument, now, is that the law doesn't matter, they'll get you in the end and that the law isn't a right (although you did use the word right...).<br />From your logic, no law represents a right, merely an obstacle to a law breaker. Thus if my employer decides to punch me then I don't have a right not to be punched, merely a means for possibly obtaining recompense in whatever form.<br />If that is what you think, then you should have stated that originally. The law is clear, it's is clearly explained, and your statement was per se wrong. Strike and you may, illegally, be sacked or may later suffer punishment. But in no case can you be sacked for the reason that you went on strike beyond the case where the employer knowingly or ignorantly chooses to ignore the law. That does not mean that you do not have the right not to be sacked.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-77662210140828608272014-06-26T09:13:08.752+01:002014-06-26T09:13:08.752+01:00"you can't be dismissed for industrial ac..."you can't be dismissed for industrial action if..."<br /><br />Let us ignore the if for one moment by assuming the criteria is fulfilled. However, in practice there are significant difficulties in proving the criteria was met, especially in the case of unrepresented/non-union staff.<br /><br />The law does not prevent the sacking of staff,. but merely provides a forum for recourse for those wishing to 'claim unfair dismissal'. Once the 12 weeks are up, what is to stop your employer sacking you for an un-related reason? How do you provide it was due to the industrial action? The mere fact of an individual getting to the stage of going on strike means there were recognizable 'issues' in the relationship between employee and employer. You could be sacked for 'unreasonable behaviour', being a poor worker, for taking too many toilet breaks, for spending too much time on the internet looking up your employment rights. You could simply be made redundant with a well-directed lack of business need for your particular function. You could put a team of people at risk, go through the rigmarole of assessing business needs versus employee skills and ultimately decide the person who happened to go on strike 3 moths earlier is the one for which there is no work in the new organization.<br /><br />And, how many years do you have to have been employed for in the UK before you are entitled to bring a claim for unfair dismissal? I'm sure you can find it on google.<br /><br />I could carry on with the caveats for a very long time. Put simply, in the UK, if an employer wants rid of an employee then there are no hurdles to stop them. The protection UK employees have is minimal. If you sack an 80-year old black female lesbian who's worked for you diligently for 40 years whilst on maternity leave, you will need a decent lawyer at the employment tribunal (if she was a union member and can therefore obtain suitable legal representation).<br /><br />If you spend your life following scripts and ticking boxes you are not going to be skilled and knowledgeable enough to contribute meaningfully to such debates. This is when backsides are used for arguing a point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-61736187270897724212014-06-26T06:36:47.131+01:002014-06-26T06:36:47.131+01:00Anon 1659.
I used my head and you can find the exp...Anon 1659.<br />I used my head and you can find the explanation of the law at:<br />https://www.gov.uk/industrial-action-strikes/your-employment-rights-during-industrial-action<br />See 'Dismissal for industrial action'.<br />I suppose the UK Gov site could be wrong but it seems very clear and lacking in abuse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-34009457433539756052014-06-25T21:54:24.439+01:002014-06-25T21:54:24.439+01:00Regarding loss of quality at the EPO: that started...Regarding loss of quality at the EPO: that started quite some time ago. But now it has become abundantly clear that expertise is not wanted. It is removed as soon as possible. Examiners are seen as box-ticking (novel: yes/no; inventive: yes/no) individuals who do not need to have any technical knowledge which would only hamper the quick granting of patents. It is a fact that a number of nationlities are under-represented becasue the working conditions are not interesting enough to leave their home country. <br />From what I learnt when visiting the EPO, it seems to me that the management has no appreciation, let alone respect, at all for the expertise and knowledge of those doing the actual work, which is examining the correctness of patent applications. Sad, very sad.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70017828441791370012014-06-25T21:44:59.221+01:002014-06-25T21:44:59.221+01:00Caption:
Cerfully looking he gets his hand back un...Caption:<br />Cerfully looking he gets his hand back unmolested.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-66366080090657195482014-06-25T16:59:48.078+01:002014-06-25T16:59:48.078+01:00"Anon 1106. If you are in the UK then I sugge..."Anon 1106. If you are in the UK then I suggest you do not know what you are talking about."<br /><br />Yes, I am in the UK. I suggest you reconsider your criticism and your facts. Find a brain to borrow for the afternoon and have a think about the reasons why you might be talking out of your backside.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-16421821429638370312014-06-25T15:10:38.597+01:002014-06-25T15:10:38.597+01:00Caption:
Yes, I know it hurts, but I have immunit...Caption: <br />Yes, I know it hurts, but I have immunity!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-42943548881856457892014-06-25T15:03:31.887+01:002014-06-25T15:03:31.887+01:00Anon 1106. If you are in the UK then I suggest you...Anon 1106. If you are in the UK then I suggest you do not know what you are talking about. You cannot be sacked for industrial action which is organised according to specific laws, primarily that it concerns a dispute between employees and employer, a ballot is carried out by the union (and scrutinised by an independent party) and 7 days notice of action is given.<br />At the EPO doing this is 'illegal' according to Battistelli's law. The union is not allowed to organise any ballot. Only Battistelli can organise a ballot (yes, really - I suspect UK law never even contemplated such a state of megalomania). Even then he is free to decide not to organise a ballot and, if he does organise one, he also includes non-union members including himself to vote against himself...<br />So, basically, you don't understand your own situation and you don't understand the EPO either.<br />For facts, check UK gov pages which explain the law simply.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-88721331243207930332014-06-25T11:06:13.878+01:002014-06-25T11:06:13.878+01:00I have the right to strike. I must accept that I ...I have the right to strike. I must accept that I will be sacked for exerting that right, however. I'm not going to lose sleep over grumblings from the EPO.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-40395269254714693312014-06-24T23:35:51.321+01:002014-06-24T23:35:51.321+01:00Anon 1648.
The earlier point was about examiners ...Anon 1648. <br />The earlier point was about examiners in Munich who do not live in NL and do not get Dutch courses. Prior to Areas of Competence, whereby now all examiners in a field are in one location, there were examiners in a field in both NL and DE. No longer. Thus Dutch language searches in a given field may have to be treated in Munich since all the examiners in that field are located there. Some directorates there will have a Dutch examiner, but not many and possibly not with the necessary technical specialism.<br />This isn't a major issue except for the non-Dutch examiners who have to do the work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-7038070891727929482014-06-24T20:09:34.221+01:002014-06-24T20:09:34.221+01:00Anon 1338, for those who Dutch is not purr-fect, a...Anon 1338, for those who Dutch is not purr-fect, a synopsis...<br />Tomorrow Battistelli and Dutch PM Mark Rutte are going to lay the first stone of the new building in rijswijk. Staff meanwhile are being victimised and silenced; for example staff can only strike if and when BB allows it and , according to Suepo, a number of staff face disciplinary measures or have been demoted. Additionally BB has removed to allow an investigation into a suicide in the office during working hours in 2013. The office says it doesn't recognise the union's portrayal of the EPO. The spokesman says there is a right to strike and that while he does know it happened, he doesn't know any details.<br /><br />Note, from me: the spokesman didn't answer the point raised I.e. That while there is a 'right' to strike, that only applies when BB gives his permission (he hasrefused at least 2 requests for ballots). With regard to the absent investigation, the office's spokesman is surprisingly unaware - in a French article today the lack was explained, after comment by BB, on the office's claim of official immunity which is being defended vigorously by the office in German and Dutch courts for other matters. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-75327735334785029392014-06-24T16:48:24.855+01:002014-06-24T16:48:24.855+01:00The number of Dutch applications is negligable. Wi...The number of Dutch applications is negligable. Within one directorate (ca 30 examiners) there were within rolling last 12 mmonths only 3 applications dealt with by non-Dutch native speakers - each of them living for at least 5 years in The Netherlands and each of them having a possibility to take a 160 hour Dutch course offered by the EPO.Dutchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-24482923122716247212014-06-24T13:38:06.330+01:002014-06-24T13:38:06.330+01:00more information on rumblings at the EPO here (in ...more information on rumblings at the EPO here (in Dutch):<br /><br />http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/22777759/__Terreur_op_werkvloer__.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-80972526271304487442014-06-24T09:23:05.580+01:002014-06-24T09:23:05.580+01:00Thank you 23:19. For the first time in months of ...Thank you 23:19. For the first time in months of complaints and criticism, digging and sarcastic remarks, someone has finally decided to provide the beginnings of an explanation into the quality drop at the EPO.<br /><br />Would anyone like to continue to add to the material?<br /><br />The lack of understanding of the subject-matter is clear. As you note, a thorough understanding of the technical subject matter is essential for producing a quality product. This applies to both attorneys and examiners. I am well aware of the poor quality work produced by generalist private practice attorneys in the specialist area of pharmaceuticals. Of course, many attorneys claim to have pharmaceuticals as a specialty. It is listed first on their web profiles, but that is merely an attempt to obtain lucrative pharma business.<br /><br />I would expect a good synthetic chemist to be able to hand organometallic work, etc, although a pharmacy specialist would clearly struggle. We are back to the problem of horses for courses, which is not followed in the patent field, at least to my knowledge amongst patent attorneys, and based on your comment, within the EPO also.<br /><br />The date of the change Jan 2013, however, does not explain the poor quality in the preceding years. It also does not explain the poor application of the EPC and case law, although I can see a problem if the technical subject-matter is completely alien to the examiner. In which case, they need to own up to their inadequacies.<br /><br />The standard of IPRPs is also clearly suggestive of a direct policy change, with orders being passed down to spend no time on them. As I said before, it is money for old rope. However, as far as applicant are concerned it is a lot of money that does not grow on trees.<br /><br />In response to the commentator who believes I do well out of the current EPO, I act solely in the interests of the applicant and not in the interest of my pocket, which has always been my main flaw from a personal finance point of view. I am extremely good value.<br /><br />In fact, I would ear a lot more a an EPO examiner. My only failing is my limited knowledge of French and lack of German. However, if quality of examination was the key factor, then I'm sure there are plenty of English applications I could be put to work on. Ideally, I would like to work within the UK, but should suitable relocation assistance and schooling for the children be on offer, then I would be interested in the move. Just tell El Presidente to give me a shout.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70196532275379607512014-06-23T23:19:09.933+01:002014-06-23T23:19:09.933+01:00Thank you for your observation re. quality (20.6 a...Thank you for your observation re. quality (20.6 at 16:02), the same for the comment in the "applicant-submitted prior art" (18.6 at 02.55). <br /><br />Pharmaceuticals are since 1.1.2013 examined in Area of Competence only on one site. This means that about one third of examiners, who studied pharmacy or synthetic chemistry, and had years of industrial experience in Pharma now need to do e.g. carbo-metal catalysts or distillations. On the other hand, process engineers were given 20 days to learn all about receptors and SAR. If you were on the wrong site, you were not allowed to move with your field or at least have a proper training. Combined with the change, all directors need to rotate. <br /><br />An attorney who does not undertand the technical field, asks the client, examiners are not given any time and not allowed to complain, otherwise they are punished by Dutch language files.<br /><br />Yes, Dutch is not an official EPO language but the examiners are responsible for the treatment of the NL and BE national files, according to the bilateral agreements. Directors decide who treat such files and French and German examiners have been forced to treat these files for raising their voice. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-14265502034510912662014-06-23T22:43:24.638+01:002014-06-23T22:43:24.638+01:0022:15 must be an examiner. Doesn't understand ...22:15 must be an examiner. Doesn't understand simple statements. Summon me to Munich to explain?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com