Posted By holmezy Morning all. I have a site that employs 3 employees with impaired hearing. The worst one is "totally deaf" but is able to have a level of hearing using a hearing aid. The 3 employees have been deaf since birth or early childhood. The environment they work in has noise levels in excess of 85dBA. All employees, except these 3, wear hearing protection and are quite happy to. Equally, the 3 deaf employees are happy not to wear the protection. The site manager says that if they dont want to wear it then he is happy for them not to. I argued that we have an increased responsibility to protect their remaining hearing levels and as such should enforce the wearing of hearing protection. The site also stopped sending all employees for audiometric testing about 3 years ago thinking that they wernt getting a "benefit" from it, and that we already know the 3 employees are deaf. We obviously dont know if we are harming the other employees. Iknow about the moral and legal responsibilties and will continue to try and convince the manager, who, to be fair, is starting to accept my point Question; can anyone point me in the direction of something "written down" to wave under the managers nose that informs us of our heightened responsibility to the 3 deaf employees? Off now to trawl the web........ Thanks Holmezy

Posted By Peter Longworth Paris v Stepney Borough Council springs to mind. An increased duty of care to employees with a specific disability in order that the disability should not be made worse. Do a google on "Paris v Stepney Borough Council" for the details.

Posted By holmezy Thanks, Ive already found that, was thinking more about some "guidance" or similar. Don't want to come over as the big "I AM" by quoting law and previous cases etc at the moment so would like to persuade by gentle methods first. Any help gratefully recieved...

Posted By Jim Walker Holmezy, I too am a deaf as a post, with very little residual hearing. It is to be noted that hearing loss is not equal across all frequencies and loud noise could damage what is left. I always use the same protection as others, my reasons are: It might protect whats left. I want to set an example. Without explaining to each individual why i don't need protection when everyone else does is more hassle than its worth. Makes life easier for shop floor managers if there is a blanket no exceptions rule. Make em wear the protection & put your efforts into noise reduction for all. Its surprising how easy it is to get noise levels down. I've seen so many places where the attitude is we have to live with all this noise and easy changes can cut levels by big margins

Posted By Jeffrey Watt Sorry Jim must have posted just as you did, didn't mean to repeat everything you said.

Posted By Jim Walker Alex, I'm deaf. I feel patronised if someone labels me with a PC term. Most PC words make those so labelled sub-standard, chip on the shoulder victims. However, call yourself what you want.

Posted By holmezy Alexander, sorry if I offended you, never the intention...perhaps its my "impaired awareness". Have an un-impaired weekend! Holmezy

Posted By Diane Thomason ...Watch out, here comes another one... holmezy, I too have a hearing impairment (hard of hearing rather than deaf, as I do have residual hearing and get by with hearing aids.) In a previous job I was advised very strongly by an Occ Health doctor (who himself was hard of hearing!) to always wear hearing protection in noisy situations, to protect my residual hearing. Would these people's doctors or audiologists be able to give a recommendation about hearing protection? Another point - people with hearing losses often have tinnitus, which can (as in my case) be made much worse by loud noise. Also the threshold of pain can be reduced in people with a hearing loss (again as in my case). I realise this may not apply to your people Holmezy. BTW Jeffrey - I just want to point out that lip-reading and sign language absolutely do not prevent social exclusion of deaf people. The latter in particular is very limited in application as obviously both parties in a signed conversation need to be trained in sign language. Signing is normally used by people who are deaf from early in life, and particularly those with speech difficulties. For those people it's fine for socialising within the "deaf community", but those of us who are deaf, hard of hearing, hearing impaired, differently-hearing-abled or whatever anyone calls us, are without doubt socially disadvantaged amongst hearing people. end of rant mode. There, now Jim, Alex and me have had a go, anyone else?? Another BTW, I believe Jack Straw has a hearing loss and this would at least partly explain why he finds it hard to communicate with women wearing the niqab. I can't hear a word someone says if they are wearing the niqab, unless they speak very, very clearly. (don't want to get into the culture/religion debate here though, just pointing out that if you rely on lip-reading to any extent at all, being able to see the person's face is crucial.)

Posted By Alexander Falconer Being hearing impaired has its uses Especially when you become very proficient in the art of lip-reading Comes in very handy, as Jim has pointed out