ABSTRACT
The East Central Division's tribunals displayed a virtually unanimous resistance towards exempting certain types of appellant. They believed men should join the army in a prescribed order, with an individual's position on the hierarchy being partly determined by his domestic responsibilities and capacity to serve. If such language denoted the prevalence of an army first mindset, then that used at other tribunals was considerably more nuanced. Yet the few similarities in the tribunals approach were overshadowed by a much greater degree of discrepancy. Indeed, the members were severely divided over the fundamental purpose of their work. Another cause of discrepancy was the large number of tribunals and members. With there being sixty-four appeal bodies in the division alone, inconsistencies were always highly likely, if not inevitable. The public allegations of bias made against the Castleford Tribunal prompted its members to start recusing themselves whenever they had even the most tenuous connection to an appellant or his place of employment.
