It is a noisy occupation and until relatively recently mitigating technology such as ear muffs weren’t around.
Deafness causes major problems.
According to the prestigious American Better Hearing Institute the main concerns are fatigue, tension, stress and depression, reduced alertness and an increased risk to personal safety, reduced job performance and social rejection and loneliness.
So on one hand a deaf farmer can be a danger to himself and others and on the other be stressed and depressed in an industry where stress and depression are real issues.
Rehabilitation for deafness is the job of ACC but it is missing in action.
Then minister Nick Smith decided in 2010 he was going to reform ACC after artificially creating a financial crisis. Hearing loss was one of the great casualties of that so-called reform.
I’ve had my own issues with ACC over hearing loss that I’ll come to but, simply put, modern hearing aids are exceptionally good, albeit expensive.
For between $4000 and $7000 you can get a good pair that will make a major difference, make you safer and reduce stress.
The problem is ACC won’t believe you have hearing loss until you reach the 6% deafness level. While it doesn’t sound much, if you’re 6% deaf you have major problems.
Surprisingly, the 2010 Cabinet Paper claimed that with a 6% hearing loss you wouldn’t need hearing aids, which is pure bollocks.
Interestingly, the 6% figure wasn’t chosen by the Government for clinical reasons but because ACC believed that gave it optimal financial savings.
So, on one hand we have the new health and safety legislation making farmers jump through hoops for no apparent value and on the other we have the Government ignoring an issue that is proven to be linked to health and safety.
The National Foundation for the Deaf produced a paper outlining the problems those with hearing disabilities would have if the changes to ACC were introduced.
The changes ignored legal obligations required by the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Human Rights Act 1993, ILO Convention 17 and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, it said.
The Government also ignored international specialist audiological research that states unequivocally that ACC’s assessment process is not scientifically validated, is unfair and inequitable.
It ignored the points made.
ACC also decided arbitrarily that age contributed to hearing loss despite there being no clinical proof.
We’ve let them get away with it.
I tried to question ACC over my hearing issues but, believe me, as well as all the shonky dealings already outlined they’ve stacked the deck.
For a start, you go to an audiologist, which is fine, then an ACC appointed ear, nose and throat specialist.
This specialist in ACC’s pay assessed me to have a 13.1% hearing loss consisting of 2.5% occupational noise, 2.8% military noise, 1% to non-work noise and 6.3% from idiopathic causes.
I had to look up the dictionary for idiopathic and the meaning is unknown.
So this “specialist” could say I specifically had 1% non-work hearing loss but a 6.3% loss from unknown causes.
He earned his ACC cheque.
I had another “expert” assess me at 5% work-related dearness, 16.4% unknown causes and 2.4% age though there is no clinical proof for the latter.
It was obviously important to keep work-related deafness under the 6% level.
I decided to appeal, which was an absolute joke with the ACC representative claiming by phone that my information had come from the internet. Don’t most people get information from the internet?
He didn’t question my facts.
I was meant to receive a review document 10 working days in advance of the hearing. It arrived on the day of the hearing.
When I mentioned this to the arbiter he claimed that was “just a request”. I did get an extension of time, not that it made any difference.
My claim was dismissed, which is what I expected from the start of the arbitration, which I found a joke.
I could appeal to the District Court but it was cheaper to pay the additional costs for hearing aids than hire a lawyer.
I’m sure ACC is aware of that fact.
My view is that if you’re partially deaf then hearing aids are made in heaven. I wear them and I don’t care if people can see them.
I can hear people when they talk to me, hear the radio, enjoy playing my guitar and I’m safer and less stressed.
I was fortunate I could afford to pay the extra cash for hearing aids, many people can’t.
I find that the utmost in discrimination, the condemnation of those people to a sub-standard life even though, in a farmers’ case, they’ve paid buckets in ACC levies.
