A critical analysis of the current South African occupational health law and hearing loss.
Warren G Manning, Mershen Pillay
PMID 32242441WHAT IT FOUND
South African occupational hearing loss law is fragmented and treats noise as the main cause.
Chemical, pressure, and vestibular causes are not clearly named. Workers are selectively protected, tested, and compensated.
Key findings
01South African occupational hearing law is split across general, mining, and shipping sectors, with different legislation and regulators.
02The main legal doctrine treats excessive noise as the only ototoxic stressor and hearing loss as the only outcome.
03Vestibular disorders and other ototoxic agents are not substantially addressed, so workers with non-noise hearing problems are at a disadvantage in protection, testing, and compensation.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a legal and policy review, not a patient study, so it does not show whether any hearing service improves outcomes. The analysis relies on the authors' experience and selected legal documents, not on measured worker health results. It excludes military and police legislation, so it does not cover those workplaces. It uses grey literature, including unpublished or non-peer-reviewed legal documents.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that South African occupational hearing law already covers all work-related hearing problems. The review says it is fragmented and mainly recognises noise-induced hearing loss, while chemical, pressure, and vestibular causes are not clearly named.