U.S. court backs ruling on deaf drivers at UPS

Discussion in 'The Latest UPS Headlines' started by ROBO MOD, Oct 11, 2006.

  1. ROBO MOD

    ROBO MOD I'm a Robot Staff Member

    U.S. court backs ruling on deaf drivers at UPS - Reuters

    United Parcel Service Inc. may not use certain regulations to exclude deaf people from applying for openings as drivers on its lighter delivery trucks, a U.S. appeals court ruled on Tuesday, affirming in part a federal district court's ruling.
     
  2. say what?

    say what? Guest

    I am currently an unloader but our center provides ear plugs for the drivers to protect themselves from the noisy delivery cars. I would like to wear plugs in the building but am not allowed to because I am told it would be "unsafe".

    Does anybody if UPS has ever been successfully sued for hearing loss caused by load machinery.
     
  3. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    I think a good worker's comp attorney could tell you that.

    Give OSHA a call, they could probably tell you the rules and guidelines regarding noisy environments and earplugs.
     
  4. hoser

    hoser Industrial Slob

    Although there is noise (particularly from those f'n rollers in the 23'ers) The noise isn't that bad. If you think it is, go to a smelting plant or an airport ramp.

    I prefer headphones tuned to the classical music station while the belt gets overloaded with boxes coming my way over earplugs :laugh:
     
  5. shifter11

    shifter11 New Member

    As aretired UPS driver this is one of the few times that I agree with the company. The DOT Hearing standards should apply to package as well as feeder drivers. Whats next with these judges will they wave vision standards for brownie drivers
     
  6. hoser

    hoser Industrial Slob

    all the decision said was that deaf people should be considered for positions. not that some sort of grande affirmative action for deaf people should be imposed. remember that deaf people can still hear through their hearing aids. the fact that they would have a hearing aid would prohibit them from applying.

    and stop asserting that judges are radicals who do whatever they feel. they were presented with an issue, came with a framework to tackle the issue agreed upon by both parties, tackled it, and justifyed it in a 100 page document.