I am currently doing some work in a processing plant belonging to one of the largest confectionery producers in the world. I was amazed to see a high percentage of employees using ear defenders with in-built radios in high decibel level areas. Am I incorrect in believing that as a result, the ear defenders provide little protection as the decibel level of the radio would be higher than that of the surrounding noise (around 90dBA)? Just thought it was unusual practice, especially for such a high profile organisation, although I could be wrong!

Do operatives need to hear instructions or emergency alarms with their PPE on, or are there visible signals? If it's the latter, then couldn't the ear defenders cut out enough noise so that operators can have the radios on at safe levels and still hear their music? I also take it that there's nothing to be do from a job design point of view to alleviate the boredom?

I would say that you have 2 issues 1. the volume in the ear defenders could be greater than 80db so you need to carry out checks to see if this is an issue. Possible manufacturers manual may state that they can't be increased above a set volume as surely this is something that would have been a consideration at the design stage. 2. Could the volume form the ear defenders increase the risk of noises in the surrounding area be missed and placing them at risk example if you have forklift trucks in the area could they not hear them coming or the horn if operated. Would they still be aware of the fire alarm or other alarms coming form the equipment which might indicate a fault. Do they need to communicate with other employees to operate the equipment id something is miss communicated could it result in someone being injured. i would look at those 2 issues if you are not satisfied and there is a risk then i would say that the radios in the ear defenders is an issue. there are plenty of people who work in a lone worker position and don't have the need to have the radio on all day in fact i would be grateful not to have it on. Phil

We had a very similar issue in our factories - used to have tannoy radios but removed them on noise grounds (and saved a lot on public licensing also...). The unions then requested personal radio ear defenders, but we would not allow these for many of the reasons quoted above: 1) Focus on the task, product quality, output etc. 2) Isolation from surroundings - product barrow movements, warning shouts etc. 3) How do you measure noise 'at the ear' as per the regs / guidance? In short, you can't (without a special calibrated noise meter 'head' like they use ar the test labs) Taking manufacturers noise attenuation guidance on face value is a risky business, as it's not 'real world' data. There is a possibility that you would not be controlling noise exposure enough. Off the top of my head, the HSE say to take 4 dB(A) (I think) off the manufacturers attenuation data to reflect this - I guess the same applies to radio ear defenders. The in-built speakers are going to produce some noise 'at the ear', so basically if the ambient noise, minus the ear defenders attenuation (based on octave band data), plus the in-built radio noise is below 80, then you're going to be ok! Of course, you can only measure some of that equation and have to guesstimate the rest..... When we took the tannoy radio away, the union claimed that production would suffer as morale dropped. Interestingly, we're about 12 months down the line now - output has risen slightly, quality has improved and absence stats remain level.

This is always going to be a difficult one, trying to control the sound levels at the ear when operatives are wearing radio headphones, especially in a noisy environment. I would expect the volume in the headphones to be limited to below 80dBA? And that the hearing protection around the speaker reduces the exterior noise to a safe level? Now here's a spanner in the works.... Noise is defined as "un-wanted sound", so could we argue that since the operator choses so listen, it is therefore a wanted sound and not a noise? Holmezy

As far a I am aware, this is not a union issue, this is a health & safety issue, Ear protection is issued for a reason and depending on the noise levels in areas of the factory you would issue suitable protection with the correct SRN rating. If the music is loud this is bound to affect their hearing, In a high noise zone they should have hearing tests every 12 months by occy health, have a safe day

quote=John j]The speakers cannot be set above 80db(A) and the manufacturer states the attenuation level on the test certificates to allow you to make a judgement as to suitability for your areas. If hearing alarms is a problem with this type of PPE its a problem with all ear defenders and visual alarms should be used. To put the positive forward you are virtually guaranteed good conplience with these that may be missing in other types. John

Thanks all, Interesting points of view. As far as I am aware, it is a union issue in this organisation and OHS plays second fiddle. I think that taking into account the alarm / emergency issues, communication problems, lack of data and means of accurate measurement, I would air on the side of caution.