Good morning,

as part of a general activity assessment it has come to light an employee has long term, moderate to severe tinnitus. We carryout fabrication processes and elimination is simply impossible (to my limited knowledge at this moment in time).

I'm about to undergo some deeper research on wider management and control but in discussion with the employee the instant he wears any form of PPE (plugs or defenders) his tinnitus becomes much worse (or awareness of it) - he actually finds high levels of background noise more manageable than wearing PPE.

All things considered, I don't want to stray into legal obligation of enforcing through monitoring, contributory negligence, increased duty of care due to known vulnerability or joint tortfeasor as he came to us with this ill-health.

I am looking at implementing a short-medium term practical control and wondering if anyone had come across anything similar regarding PPE measures? I imagine there may be something that could transmit certain frequencies to ease the pain of tinnitus without exposing him to further environmental harm within the workshop - before I look at redesign and better segregation.

Occupational health is in soon for a range of surveillance including noise so I will seek advice there too. But in the mean time I would appreciate any experiences anyone has practically of this situation?

Thanks in advance

Hi Ian,

yes, I had Stepney Borough Council in mind when I mentioned increased duty of care. Thanks for the response, between the Director for HR and the worker involved, before my very recent appointment there was no address.

After my initial review there is now a focus on the activity, and STOP the employees exposure (there is nothing else for him to do within the company) has been returned as not an option. The legal status is know - but as I referred to in my question, I'm hoping for other to share experiences until the right professionals get back in touch.

Thanks for the response

Clearly I dont know your company, but I've heard (excuse the pun) this numerous times and it just is not true.
With simple cheap measures I have advised fab shops and have been able to reduce noise levels by 3 fold.

For example:
One place had a turrent punch press that affected 30 men in the surrounding area, noise levels were way over the old action levels let alone the current ones. Replacing worn out tooling (which in paid for itself in quality uplifts) and building a 3 metre wide breeze block dividing wall. After that only the operative had to wear Ear defenders, such was the reduction.

If you were not so far away I'd give you on site advice so confident I am you could reduce the noise.

As you are a fabrication company - I have seen other fabrication companies make their own sound absorbing panels at minimal cost.

A framework, to hold a panel which has multiple holes on one side. Built into the 'sandwich' - the filling is a suitable sound absorbent foam etc.

The panel side with the holes in is positioned facing the noise source.

The panels can be mounted on castors/wheels etc, so they can be moved around.

Solutions are possible to reduce the noise transmission distance.

Brilliant again, and thanks - I'll look into it a little more regarding movable absorption panels we may be able to fabricate ourselves.

And apologies Walker, I meant the company. I spent sometime on the phone with their 'rep' yesterday who is more than helpful. To be frank, some more 'known' risks are managed better than others. Identifying savings, when what IMO is currently a significant lack of control, is difficult as there is no previous benchmark or costs being counted, other than arbitrary PPE provision which I wouldn't scrap going forward - so everything is initial outlay and telling someone they've got it wrong for a few years now is stretching the art of diplomacy.

But once again, grateful for your valid information.

I do wish this website had vote up (likes) like facebook.

Walker - I'd have given you many many many likes. :)


I worked for a company that made vending machines. Part of the process required metal presses and punching to occur, then dry powder coating and heat curing. This generated noise & vibration.

I talked to all the people (the workers or stakeholders) and it became obvious early on that the noise could be stopped or at least seriously abated. The company response was to me poor to say the least, just PPE in the form of disposable earplugs and over glasses.

I found the company websites that produced the machines and discovered quickly that the noise & vibration could be stopped. Before I left the company, I spoke to the manager I reported to and gave them a very short report suggesting fixes. I got the distinct impression nothing was going to happen to fix it.

I find it very annoying that current legislation cannot be retrofitted to old machinery - please correct me if I'm wrong.

Hi all,

Ian Bell, I've in boxed you, but I know myself the alerts don't always come through unless linked to emails. I'm interested in the screening options you referred to if you have a moment.

Thanks

Out of interest I just did an internet search on "industrial noise absorbing panels" and there were many listings.

It would be very easy to buy some of these and find that little difference is made to noise levels as it is quite likely that the noise will not only be transmitted directly but also via reflections and via the structure itself.

An acoustic engineer specialising in industrial noise should be able to offer good advice. I'm sure a search engine can point to plenty of these too.

Don't some ear defenders come fitted with radios or inputs for mp3 players?

Might be a controlled way of introducing some "noise" without hitting dangerous levels. Might distract from the tinnitus?