Repository logo
    Info Pages
    Content PolicyCopyright & Access InfoDepositing to MRODeposit LicenseDeposit License SummaryFile FormatsTheses FAQDoctoral Thesis Deposit
    Communities & Collections
    All of MRO
  • English
  • العربية
  • বাংলা
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Ελληνικά
  • Español
  • Suomi
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • हिंदी
  • Magyar
  • Italiano
  • Қазақ
  • Latviešu
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Српски
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Tiếng Việt
Log In
New user? Click here to register using a personal email and password.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Manning WG"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Results Per Page
  • Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A critical analysis of the current South African occupational health law and hearing loss
    (AOSIS, 2020-03-24) Manning WG; Pillay M
    Background: Occupational health laws must recognise the constitutional requirement of substantive equality, and its role in ‘the progressive realisation’ of the rights provided by Section 27. Objectives: Our main aim is to review current South African occupational health law (vis-à-vis workers’ constitutional rights) in relation to hearing loss. We focus on gaps in the law regarding occupational hearing loss in South Africa. Method: Our review of legal texts relies on experience as a methodological device augmented by the use of a critical science. Guided by literature or evidence synthesis methodologies, South African primary and secondary laws were reviewed along with unpublished (non-peer-reviewed) grey literature. An established six-step framework guided our thematic analysis. A semantic approach aided the critical interpretation of data using the Bill of Rights as a core analytical framework. Results: Four themes are discussed: (1) separate and unequal regulatory frameworks; (2) monologic foregrounding of noise; (3) minimisation of vestibular disorders; and (4) dilution of ototoxic agents. The highly divided legal framework of occupational health and safety in South Africa perpetuates a monologic ‘excessive noise-hearing loss’ paradigm that has implications for the rights of all workers to equal protections and benefits. There is a need to harmonise occupational health and safety law, and expand the scope of hearing-protection legislation to include the full range of established ototoxic hazards. Conclusion: Occupational audiology is dominated by efforts to address noise-induced hearing loss. A ‘noise’ despite the reality of workers’ exposures to a range of ototoxic stressors that act synergistically on the ear, resulting in audio-vestibular disorders.

Copyright © Massey University  |  DSpace software copyright © 2002-2026 LYRASIS

  • Contact Us
  • Copyright Take Down Request
  • Massey University Privacy Statement
  • Cookie settings
Repository logo COAR Notify