Forum

Replies

• 

  Paul McNulty November 5, 2012 at 10:31pm

  Jeez, how many times can we see people expect to be paid for their own stupidity? The equipment is clearly labled with "wear suitable ear and eye protection", so if you choose to work for decades without it then it's your own fault.

  Just bought a pair of these for £16. http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B001BL04PS/ref=oh_details_o05_s0...

  Probably a better bet than not wearing ear protection, then trying to sue someone when you can't hear the TV. And, they are a slim fit for the fashion-conscious gardener, so you don't look like an extra in a Dr Who Cyberman episode when wearing them......
• 

  John Baker November 6, 2012 at 12:01am

  I would have thought it would have left him too deaf to hear wife, in which case I would have thought the taxman would be looking at this as a benefit in kind.
• PRO

  Gary RK November 6, 2012 at 6:14am

  He was an employee so, how much does the liability rest with the 'employer' ?

  If he was given no/little training, had no suitable PPE or was maybe was under implicit pressure to 'just do the job' - where does the duty of care rest ?

  How much was his own fault ?

  Does old equipment display the same level of warning that we all take for granted ?

  As with all these types of injury, the realisation of the damage can take years to accept........
• 

  Colin Hunt November 6, 2012 at 6:31am

  This case dates back over 30 years when H & S issues were a grey area.  The world was changing and what seems obvious now, wasnt so back then.
• 

  Gordon Bowerman November 6, 2012 at 7:44am

  If he wins its elf and safety gone mad yet again, if he had of used a bit of common sense he probably would not have hearing problems or perhaps his hearing loss is natural anyway. 

  Its not like its rocket science if you are in a loud environment you will notice the effect on your ears and most people choose to wear ear defenders/plugs. If you dont its your choice, you dont really need health and safety for this.
• PRO

  Brian www.mibservices.co.uk November 6, 2012 at 8:18am

  Not really Gordon, look at all the ex miners claims for deafness and white finger from years of machine use down the pits. The level of knowledge and H&S back in the 80's wasnt what it is now.
  
  
  
  Gordon Bowerman said:

  If he wins its elf and safety gone mad yet again, if he had of used a bit of common sense he probably would not have hearing problems or perhaps his hearing loss is natural anyway. 

  Its not like its rocket science if you are in a loud environment you will notice the effect on your ears and most people choose to wear ear defenders/plugs. If you dont its your choice, you dont really need health and safety for this.
• 

  Gordon Bowerman November 6, 2012 at 8:34am

  bit of a difference working down a mine to gardening, but agree that places like mines etc. are where health and safety are life savers I just think there is too much importance put on health and safety in everyday life and not enough on common sense.

  The other thing is how are they going to tell if his deafness is from garden machinery and not from something else, for all the judge knows the guy could have been a part time roadie for motorhead ;)
• PRO

  Brian www.mibservices.co.uk November 6, 2012 at 9:03am

  Lol, loving the motorhead roadie ;-). Personal H&S is down to common sense, but how often do you pass users of noisy kit and no ppe. As it so often seems common sense is in short supply as you say.
  
  
  Gordon Bowerman said:

  bit of a difference working down a mine to gardening, but agree that places like mines etc. are where health and safety are life savers I just think there is too much importance put on health and safety in everyday life and not enough on common sense.

  The other thing is how are they going to tell if his deafness is from garden machinery and not from something else, for all the judge knows the guy could have been a part time roadie for motorhead ;)
• 

  David Cox November 6, 2012 at 9:53am

  surely the issue would be, as an employee was he provided with ear defenders? If so but he chose not to wear them... then its his fault... if not then depending on the Regulations at the time, it could be the employers - but If their was no regulation requiring hearing protection - the employer did nothing wrong, and could fairly argue they did not reasonably know of the risk... I suppose it will boil down to that!
• 

  Paul McNulty November 6, 2012 at 10:47am

  Well, I might be being too unsympathetic but if you don't realise that something's noisy, and using it all day every day, for decades, it doesn't occur to you that ear protection might be a good idea, you deserve everything you get. Just as if you use equipment that shoots sharp bits of metal in all directions you should be wearing eye protection. If you take hot trays out of an oven all day every day you might want to wear oven gloves.

  Health and safety legislation should not be used as a substitute for common sense, and regardless of any rules in place at the time he should have taken responsibility for his own safety IMO.