APPEAL BOARD INQUIRIES

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23315, 29 April 1941, Page 12

APPEAL BOARD INQUIRIES

Sir, —From a study of the decisions of Appeal Boards I have at times noted apparent inconsistency, apparent leniency. I believe this can usually be explained by the fact that Appeal Board personnel lack sufficient personal knowledge of the appellants’ positions and are influenced overmuch by the pleading of legal representatives who are, presumably, paid to make a weak case appear strong or a reasonably strong case very strong.' How to get over it? So far as the country is concerned, in each district appoint some person of integrity who knows that district to examine district cases before they are taken before the Appeal Board. Such a person, knowing the appellant's actual position, the availability of labour in the district, and other relevant matters, would have the responsibility of endorsing the appeal or of refusing to endorse it. His refusal to endorse the appeal, however, would not necessarily preclude appellant from the right of appearing before the Appeal Board. The effect of the attitude of the district representative would simply be to give the board a better insight into the merits or demerits of the case. So far as the towns and cities are concerned, if the appellant is employed in a Government service, he could take his case to the Director of National Service; an employee or employer in industry could take his case to an appointed representative of, say, the Manufacturers’ Association. And so on. I believe that if something were done along these lines, the work of the Appeal Boards would be made less difficult and that their decisions would, as a result, more consistently fit the true facts of the case.—Yours, etc., C. April 28, 1941.