Salt Lake Telegram | 1931-12-07 | Page 11 | Charge Denied by Industrial

CHARGE DENIED I I BY BOARD OF UTAH I Commission Replies Sharply to Allegation Workmen Get Unfair Show Char Charges es of the Judicial council of ot the state bar commission that the industrial commission is unfair to workmen and that only attorneys should shoud plead cases before that body were sharply criticised Monday in ina a scathing reply by O. O F F. F McShane of the industrial commission The Judicial council at the conclusion conI con con- con con- I elusion of a meeting Saturday de declared declared de- de dared that since working men ap appealing appealing appealing ap- ap pealing for compensation had bad been allowed to appear before the industrial Indus indus- trial commission while corporations and companies were represented by adjusters and attorneys the former might be treated unfairly The council held that this was es especially es- es true tru when cases were taken to the supreme court where the matler matter mat mat- ter ler usually is decided on the record of the industrial commission hear bear ing ine CHARGES DENIED Mr McShane Monday declared that the commission is functioning properly and that he believed the ju judicial judicial judicial ju- ju council is wrong William M. M Knerr chairman of the industrial commission concurred and added that he was against any plan which would allow only attorneys to appeal before belore the commission Mr McShane produced figures to show that since the workmen's compensation com corn law aw went into effect in 1917 there have been contested cases heard About of these went vent to the supreme court on appeal he pointed out of which more than 60 per cent were won by the commission commis commis- sion We have no quarrel with the legal lights of Utah he said but t we do want to call caU attention to one thing We decide our cases in from t ten n days to two weeks When they are arc appealed to the supreme court it often requires months and sometimes years before a decision is reached Under our method of procedure wo 0 deal justice as we see fit and nd move to the next case ease There is no jockeying around APPLICANTS ADVISED which has I When we see a case some some pretty technical legal gal points we tell teU the applicant he ho should have counsel When there is apparently no need of of counsel we do not tell them to hire l lawyers If the people of this state want to tie up the work of these quasi judicial bodies with court procedure then the proper thing thine to o do is to o abolish this commission and others and turn the matters directly over overto to the courts I If such stich a a thing is done there Is only one demand I will make That Thatis is that the employers be deprived of using negligence as a defense We have cases on record where suits for death have been filed tiled in the tho courts of the state rather than with the Industrial in industrial industrial In- In commission and the applicants applicants applicants cants have received as low Jow as in judgment Many of them would re receive receive receive re- re as high as if the commission commission commis commis- sion slon acted We also have turned over to the state bar commission some good ex examples examples ex- ex amples of improper practice on the part of attorneys before this commission commission commission commis commis- sion and if the bar commission wants to do something it might make an in investigation In- In of th these s cases