The European Patent Office (EPO) Looks Like It is Being Evacuated (Entire Floors and Offices Emptied), According to EPO Insiders
What's the long-term plan of the notorious outsourcer from EUIPO? More Serco [1, 2]? What else? Pan-European Seal Programme?
LAST year we wrote a number of articles or did a number of videos about Bringing Teams Together (BTT) - a scheme wherein the European Patent Office sought to actually tear staff apart.
The following report from Munich shows what insiders think of BTT and there are some photos, too.
Örtlicher Personalausschuss München Innenstadt, Haar und Brüssel
Local Staff Committee Munich City, Haar and Brussels
Le Comité local du Personnel de Munich Ville, Haar et BruxellesMunich, 12-12-2023 sc23020mp
Report on the 52nd Meeting of the Munich Local Occupational Health, Safety and Ergonomics Committee (LOHSEC)
On 7 November 2023 the meeting took place with Staff Representatives of the LSC Munich (LSC MN), members of the Administration, health, safety and facility services, as well as a representative for the Boards of Appeal.
Present were Elodie Bergot (Chair; PD Welfare and Renumeration, EB), Roberta Romano-Götsch (Chief Sustainability Officer, RRG), Detlev Schüder (Medical Advisor, DS), Christian Neumann (Member of the Infrastructure Services, CN), Michael Böcker (Occupational Safety expert, MB), Alexander Kirch (Occupational Safety, AK), Katja Warneck (Representative for BoA, KW), Susett Rolle (SR; Member of LSC MN, SRo), Matthias Goebel (SR; Member of LSC MN, MG), Fiona Dullenkopf (Social Dialogue Secretariat, FD), Alyssa Drouault (Member of HR, AD), Edoardo d’Attilia (Young Professional HR, EdA).
A staff change was introduced, Johannes de Bruin from TH to replace Michael Böcker for reason of his retirement. He shortly introduced himself.
The meeting lasted from 10:30h to 11:45h
1. Report from the COHSEC
The Chair gave a short oral report on the COHSEC meeting of 16 October. The main topics addressed during the COHSEC were as follows:
▪ Statistics on sick leave: Due to an issue, the dashboard and its statistics were not available on time. Now the problem has been solved, and the figures will be provided to the COHSEC at its next meeting. The trend on the sickness is positive (decreasing), however higher than pre-pandemic level.
▪ Bringing Teams Together: Moves in TH and Berlin were done, no issue reported. Only an oral update was done in the meeting. Following a question sent by the staff representatives it was clarified that there was no background document for the COHSEC.
▪ ISO45001 certification: Requirement for an occupational health and safety management system. Presented by colleagues from “Performance risk and compliance”. The EPO is compliant with ISO certification and follows the H&S requirements with int’l standards. Minor recommendations for improvement were given by the auditors (e.g. systematic formalisation of documentation, transfer of knowledge). It is intended to report on the re-certification in the first COHSEC meeting of 2024 once the process has been finalised.
▪ Health & Safety objectives 2023. Office-wide topic. 1st round of discussions on the document which foresees promoting hybrid environment including physical and psychological health. The document will be presented on the 29-11 COHSEC for opinion. The feedback from the COHSEC Staff Representative colleagues is taken on board.
The SR noted that oral presentations of figures and detailed findings were hard to follow and difficult to recall; an accompanying document would seem appropriate.
2. Points raised by the Staff Representation members of the LOHSEC
The Chair presented the points raised by SR for discussion.
2.1. As to the status of the action points M 04/2023, M 05/2023, AP 06/2023:
The following answer was provided orally and in writing:
2.2. As to the building planning BT 5+6
The SR inquired about the result of the presentation to the president on the planning for BT 5+6 was, concerning apparently glass walls for all offices there. Reiterating from the previous LOHSEC meeting, SR maintained that they would like to be filled in on the details, e.g.: a. What kind of glass, i.e., the level of noise reduction? b. where is it placed, noting that e.g., cupboards, various tubing, power cables are found it the walls of the offices separating them from the hallways.
The administration replied that planning work was still in progress, neither concrete plans with technician involvement nor a presentation to the President having taken place yet, the former being a prerequisite for the latter. It was furthermore doubtful whether this would even take place in the next half year. In any case, once a building plan is presented to the President, the information will be communicated by PD44. Details such as glass walls will follow at a later stage. SR will be taken on board at the level of planning aims, however not after the decision of the President.
In response to a question from SR regarding the logic behind closing a building if there are no concrete plans as to its future, the administration replied with environmental, as well as financial savings and Bringing Teams Together (“BTT”) policy reasons.
2.3. As to the outlook for PH 1-4
The SR inquired about the outlook for PH 1-4 in the foreseeable future. They noted that the top three floors with plenty of office space continued to look like they had just been evacuated:
On the other hand, some staff members did not have an office, e.g. mothers with children attending the Crèche and other staff fulfilling the previously announced criterion of office presence at least three days a week.
The administration replied that said floors were being kept vacated for “continuous maintenance” purposes, for storage as well as for reasons of fulfilling the purpose of the BTT project, which project was not at issue here in the LOHSEC.
The SR further inquired about the scope of the announced “Brandschutzertüchtigungen”, the only construction measures presently visible.
The administration briefly replied that only standard modernization was involved and that there was “no safety issue” involved. Moreover, the administration confirmed that all offices respected all the necessary health and safety requirements.
It may be noted here that SR had not invoked any health and safety issues.
2.4. As to presenting rolling occupancy rates
The SR reiterated its inquiry as to whether it would it be possible to show the rolling occupancy rates of the EPO sites again. It would be interesting to see any recent trends vs the last available figures back in October 2022 (see also AP M 05/2023). In particular, the SR wondered how the maximum occupancy rate of 60% (average 50%), as noted in the minutes of the last (51st) LOHSEC meeting (item vi therein), could be reconciled with the present Intranet values of 33 % (MN) and 37 % (TH).
(https://intranet.epo.org/the-office/new-ways-working/bringing-our-teams-together)
The administration replied, noting many factors influencing occupancy rate and its determination. In essence, it was reviewing the way the statistics should be presented before publishing them again. The objective was to avoid a “misinterpretation” of the figures and ensure consistency across the data presented. Thus the figures were not coupled with the planning tool, highly dependent on the particular week-day looked at, as well as the particular season. DG4 looked at the “whole” of BTT, not just the planning tool or other particularities.
The SR again noted that such presentation must be clear, in particular the determination method, and consistent; these requirements applied all the more now that renting out plans are on the (President’s) table once again, “depending on occupancy” of PH 1-4.
2.5. As to sustainability/safety regarding dark corridors and frequent switching of LED lights
The SR inquired how the frequent switching of the LED lights in PH 1-4 affected their life span. Such frequent switching happened due to the very dark hallways in PH 1-4 and the short span of illumination of the LED’s (to conserve power). What would the calculation of energy saving by dark periods vs increased spending due to shortened life span look like? The SR noted that the answer given last time (cf minutes 51st LOHSEC, item vii) dodged the actual question, as had been brought forward by the Staff Representation as well. It further noted that it was well aware of the fact that LED’s were more energy efficient than light bulbs.
The administration replied that no calculations have so far been performed, the observation period being still too short. On the other hand, a constant “lights on”, say from 07:00 to 19:00h, was “not possible” with the presently installed controlling unit. However, a technical question being concerned, more investment could lead to the realization of new concepts.
2.6. As to sustainability/health/safety/BTT
The SR inquired whether any calculations of savings due to reduced energy needs of buildings upon evacuation (assuming a minimum temperature of 12 °C and periodic maintenance measures) vs cost of removals (of nearly everyone at the EPO) and inter alia excessive waste so produced (to be typically incinerated) and lost PGP productivity have been performed. If so, what was the outcome?
The administration replied that none have so far been performed. However various recycling measures have been initiated, e.g. https://intranet.epo.org/the-office/sustainability-the-epo/environmental-sustainability ; While the SR in principle liked the idea, it nevertheless pointed out that the proportions were unfavourable: a minute fraction of recycled material vs well over 90% of discarded (or very long-term stored material).
The SR further pointed out that the slides shared by the administration in the 51st LOHSEC meeting were inconclusive as to any calculation of savings here at issue. With possibly one exception: even before BTT, a substantial energy savings could be seen. However, very little data was available for 2023, the year of interest, cf:https://bi4you.internal.epo.org/#/views/CO2Emissions_16796487223300/Progresstowardscarbonneutrality?:iid=1
The administration replied that the constant downward trend was shown in other graphs as well, e.g.
(https://bi4you.internal.epo.org/#/views/BuildingEnergyConsumption_16756735341230/Energyconsumptionofownedbuildings-overview?:iid=2) In any case BTT had been decided, this LOHSEC meeting was the wrong format for any revision attempts. Moreover these calculations of savings were not related to any health and safety issue and should therefore not be answered in the LOHSEC.
2.7. As to the regulation of office temperatures
The SR noted that the regulation of office temperatures in summer and winter was unsatisfactory, going substantially above, e.g., 28 °C, or below recommended office temperatures. Yet ticket generation was no catch-all solution since for some “known” problems ticketing is deactivated. The SR inquired whether any overhaul or similar was foreseen.
The administration replied that an intranet announcement has been made to explain the upcoming office temperatures, the setting being raised from 19 °C to 20 °C. Any anomalies detected during the summer would be analysed, since every opened ticket had been followed up very seriously. Moreover, temperatures and technical installations were regularly checked.
2.8. As to “public” lockers for visitors
The SR inquired about the possibility of having “public” lockers or similar for visitors of other buildings, noting that neither the closets nor the doors of offices for a day are lockable? This applies in particular to the ISAR building with “public” offices for a day.
The administration replied that although this was not a Health and Safety issue, the idea of installing lockers in the canteen so that staff members who go to lunch in a building other than their own (e.g., from ISAR to PSCHORR or the opposite) can leave their belongings there will be studied by the administration. A new action point was generated, AP 07/2023: Check if available lockers close to the canteen can be built.
2.9. As to printing room and post room “rearrangements”
Concerning the issue of printing in the future, the SR was wondering whether there was an intent behind rearranging a post room so that all tables were removed, and shelves are placed below the pigeonholes, to result in a kind of bend over and crawl on the floor exercise (blue), some colleagues now having unusable mail slots (red)? In the shown post room PH N 4/2, before there were several tables where the printer and mail items were spread out for the 174 pigeonhole users. Now all tables in the room were removed. If there was an intention in this, what might it be?
The administration responded that this rearrangement was essentially a reaction to messy paper piles on the tables which needed to be cleaned up again and again. FM offered to work on a better solution with SR.
The SR remarked that at least back problems as health issues for colleagues might be caused, even if they don’t use the printer but just pick up their mail from the same spot (e.g. paper files).
DS replied for the administration in his capacity as medical advisor that he did not see any health risks from scrounging around once or twice a day, in order to pick up mail and/or prints.
2.10. As to future in-person LOHSEC meetings
Finally the SR inquired about the possibility of holding future LOHSEC meetings in an in-person or hybrid format.
The administration replied that it was not intended to have meetings in presence. If desired, SR who are present on the premises may sit together in the same room.
Your representatives of the Local Staff Committee Munich (LSC MN)
There are references above to the temperatures being tampered with for alleged cost reduction reasons [1, 2]. Examiners suspect it's done to make them less comfortable at work. Lots of greenwashing is misused and misapplied to make invalid, factually-unsound justifications, lacking any concrete rationale.
The EPO not only lost its appeal. It lost any illusions that it adheres to the Rule of Law. It's just a rubber-stamping agency of internationalists; regulatory capture even extended to the court systems (BoA, UPC etc.) so it's basically tyranny by the rich, for the rich. █