My first comment concerned people's ability to be represented.
Now I would like to emphasize that, when a worker asks to be represented, a more meticulous job has to be done. A person who represents himself will do his work when he receives the appeal docket and has to go and pick up his documents. Normally, that's suitable and we also guide them a little.
However, when there are submissions, there are firm deadlines, for both the representative and the claimant. If we go and pick up medical documents, testimony, have an appointment with legal aid or whatever, that becomes involuntary for all the parties. If the claimant himself requests a postponement, that's legitimate. If he wants to delay the hearing, that's his choice.
It's legitimate for the commission to want to have people proceed as soon as possible so that they can be heard. That's a good thing. However, if the person is prepared to delay the hearing in order to mount a better defence and secure better representation, that's legitimate as well. If there are unavoidable factors because we want to do a good job of defence, we're responsible for that. When the chairs make a peremptory decision, we have to appear. We nevertheless ask for another postponement, even though that's perhaps being a little stubborn. If it's a decision that concerns the decision, we'll challenge everything before the umpire, which results in needless costs for the commission.
I would recommend slightly more flexible time periods in this regard when claimants are being represented.