In Thompson v Smiths Shiprepairers, Mustill J said that “after publication of Noise and the Worker there was no excuse for ignorance.” He also said about it that it was “a pamphlet which explained the problem, and some of the steps which might be taken to overcome it, in the clearest possible way.”
So what exactly did Noise and the Worker say back in 1963 as to noise and what should be done to prevent damage caused by it, and was there any significant difference between what was said then (and so the ‘knowledge’ which employers would gain from its publication) and the precautions which would now be expected?
The pamphlet itself, published by the then Ministry of Labour, runs to about 15 pages of A5 size text. It can be quickly read, with technical definitions kept to a minimum and explained as necessary. It was re-published in 1968 and 1971. The original pamphlet was published following the interim Wilson report published in March 1963.
The Introduction to the pamphlet noted that noise was not a new problem, but that it was something which had been known about in industry for a long time and tended to be accepted by both management and workers as simply part of the job. It did recognise that there was still much to be learnt about the problem of noise, and that research was ongoing. It explained that noise was a problem not only by potentially being a cause of accidents (since workers would not be able to hear warnings and the like) but also long-term problems in what we now describe as noise induced hearing loss.
It noted some potential reasons for thinking an employer might have a problem with noise, for example:
- Do workers find it difficult to hear each other speak while they are at work in a noisy environment?
- Have workers complained of head noises or ringing in the ears after working in noise for several hours?
- Have workers who have been exposed to very high noise levels for short periods experienced temporary deafness, severe enough for them to seek medical advice?
- Have workers exposed for longer periods complained of a loss of hearing such as the effect of muffling speech and certain other sounds? Have they been told by their families that they are becoming deaf?
- Has there been a higher labour turnover in workshops or sections where there is a lot of noise?
- Has management formed the opinion that noise is affecting production?
It suggested that if the answer was yes to several of those questions, then the first thing they should do is conduct a noise reduction and hearing conservation programme. A noise survey and specialist advice should be sought.
For large-scale programmes it may be necessary to involve a Medical Officer and conduct engineering and structural changes.
The pamphlet describes the measurement of noise, and how the ear hears at different frequencies and also how the loudness/ intensity is measured.
With regards to the danger levels of noise, it was described that it was necessary to judge not only how noisy a particular place is at any one time, but also to consider the exposure during a working day and over a working life. It is noted that when a worker is exposed to noise for eight hours a day for five days a week of 85 decibels or more in any octave band, in the speech range of frequency (500 to 4,000 cycles per second), it was desirable to introduce a programme of noise reduction or hearing conservation.
As to noise reduction, environmental control of noise is suggested in terms of the premises themselves (such as choosing quieter machinery and placing noisy machinery away from work areas if possible), also as to reduction of noise at the source (reduction in the noise of the noisy machinery itself). A number of ways are described such as adding silencers to machinery, maintaining machinery correctly or changing the way that machines are operated.
It suggested that workers could move a location further away from machinery so that the noise does not damage their hearing so much, or the machinery can be enclosed.
Alterations in working arrangements such as shift or rotation systems are suggested.
Hearing conservation is suggested in the form of both ear plugs and what are described as ear muffs. A system of monitoring workers’ hearing for those who are exposed to a high level of noise is also suggested.
To the modern reader, perhaps the most surprising feature of the pamphlet is how similar the suggestions in it would be to similar suggestions today: start by measuring the noise and so assessing whether there is a dangerous level of noise; reduction of noise at the source, the machinery itself; reduction of the noise transmitted through the air or building structures; alterations in working arrangements; and the introduction of hearing conservation in the form of ear protection and the monitoring of workers’ hearing.