In the recent case of Duryea v Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd [2025] SAET 78, the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) delved into the intricacies of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) claims, discussing the contentious issue of tinnitus and its impact on compensation entitlements. This matter serves as a critical reminder for employers about the importance of thorough and consistent medical assessments, clear guidelines, and accurate reporting.

This matter arose when Mr Duryea, who had lodged a NIHL claim against Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd, sought compensation for hearing aids and a lump sum entitlement. Central considerations in this matter involved the differing opinions on the impact of tinnitus on Mr Duryea’s hearing loss, leading to varying assessments of hearing loss by different medical professionals.

Initially, Dr. Diamantis assessed Mr Duryea's binaural hearing loss at 3.6% without considering tinnitus. However, Dr. Fagan later assessed Mr Duryea and concluded a total binaural hearing impairment of 7.4%, which was increased to 10.4% after accounting for tinnitus. This discrepancy raised questions about the significance of tinnitus and the accuracy of the assessments, noting the difference in potential entitlements when comparing the assessment of each medical professional.

When Considering Claims for NIHL:

1. Consistency in Medical Assessments: The matter underscores the importance of consistency in medical assessments. Different opinions on the impact of tinnitus can lead to significant variations in compensation entitlements.
2. Clarity in Impairment Assessment Guidelines: It was considered in Duryea that the Impairment Assessment Guidelines, in the assessment of NIHL, should provide clear definitions and criteria for conditions like severe tinnitus. This clarity will help ensure that assessments are accurate and consistent.
3. Accurate Self-Reporting: Mr Duryea's self-reporting played a crucial role in the differing assessments. Employers should give consideration to all claim and investigation material, including medical reports, to ensure that workers provide accurate and consistent information and reporting.

Takeaway Messages for Employers:

1. Provide Clear Guidelines to Medical Examiners: Employers should provide clear guidelines to medical examiners when seeking to obtain reports, including requesting they take a detailed history, as well as requesting the examiner consider and give proper regard to information provided, to facilitate assessments being consistent and accurate.
2. Encourage Accurate Self-Reporting: Employers should encourage workers to provide accurate self-reporting during medical examinations. This will aim to assist examinations and reports being based on consistent and truthful information, so as to avoid discrepancies.
3. Considering Medical Reports Carefully: Whilst medical examiners must use their clinical judgement when considering and assessing a worker’s reporting of tinnitus, employers should give careful consideration to documents and material gathered during the course of investigations, in conjunction with medical reports obtained addressing NIHL, so as to ensure consistency in reporting.

This matter demonstrates the importance of clear and sound reasoning in medical reports, as well as the importance of consistency in assessment over time, particularly as relates to tinnitus, when managing claims for NIHL. By understanding the intricacies of NIHL claims and the importance of accurate and consistent assessments, employers can better navigate claims and potential disputes to ensure a fair and equitable outcome.