Primary sources used
Plain English answer
How this assessment usually works
Hearing impairment assessment usually depends on proper audiology evidence, occupational noise exposure history, protection records and the NSW hearing-loss method. It is not enough to say the worker has trouble hearing; the report needs to connect measurable hearing loss to work exposure.
The assessor does not decide legal liability. The assessment is a medical opinion about permanent impairment under the NSW workers compensation guidelines. The legal importance is what the percentage does to Section 66, weekly payments, medical expense time limits, settlement strategy or work injury damages preparation.
Step 1
Accepted injury
Check the accepted injury wording, body system and mechanism before looking at the percentage.
Step 2
Medical method
Check whether the correct NSW guideline method, clinical findings and records were used.
Step 3
Claim effect
Check what the WPI percentage changes before accepting a report or settlement position.
How the assessment pathway is usually built
A useful WPI report should show its working. For hearing loss and tinnitus, the pathway usually needs these steps before anyone relies on the percentage.
Start with a reliable occupational noise history: employers, machinery, tools, vehicles, duration, protection, training and non-work exposure.
Obtain technically reliable audiology. The assessment should not rely only on a worker saying they struggle in conversation.
Use the NSW hearing-loss method, which refers to AMA5 Chapter 11 and National Acoustic Laboratories material rather than a generic ENT impairment approach.
Review age-related, non-work and previous-hearing-loss deductions. The report should explain the factual basis rather than assume all loss is occupational or all loss is ageing.
Consider tinnitus only in the correct hearing impairment context and with appropriate clinical reasoning.
Assessment method points from the NSW guideline
These points are not a self-calculation tool. They are practical checks for whether the WPI report is using the right body-system method and reasoning.
NSW hearing impairment assessment follows the NSW hearing-loss method, with reference to AMA5 Chapter 11 and the National Acoustic Laboratories material identified in the guideline.
The assessor should use reliable audiology and a careful occupational noise exposure history. A bare audiogram is not enough if exposure and causation are disputed.
Hearing protection, training, employment history and non-work hearing factors may affect causation and apportionment.
Tinnitus should be considered within the correct hearing assessment context rather than used as a loose description.
The report should distinguish measured binaural hearing impairment, WPI conversion and work-related contribution.
If several employments involved noise, the chronology may matter for contribution, insurer responsibility and evidence strategy.
A worker with gradual industrial deafness may need older audiograms, pre-employment records and job histories, not just the most recent test.
ENT or audiology reports should explain reliability, masking, test conditions and any inconsistency in results.
What can change the WPI percentage
The final percentage can move because of method selection, objective findings, surgery, pre-existing deduction, or how multiple impairments are combined. These are the practical pressure points for this injury type.
- Pure-tone audiometry and whether the testing is reliable and current.
- Noise exposure chronology and whether the report captures all relevant noisy jobs or tools.
- Apportionment between occupational noise, age-related change, recreational noise, disease or other non-work causes.
- Whether hearing protection records reflect actual day-to-day workplace use.
- Whether the hearing loss pattern is consistent with occupational noise exposure.
What the assessor usually checks
- audiology testing quality and whether the correct occupational-noise history was recorded
- duration, intensity and type of noisy work exposure
- use or absence of hearing protection, training and workplace records
- whether non-work causes are being relied on and how they are reasoned
- whether tinnitus is considered in the correct context rather than used as a vague label
Evidence that may help
A useful WPI report depends on the material the assessor receives. These records often matter for hearing loss and tinnitus:
- audiograms and specialist ENT or audiologist reports
- employment history showing noisy work tasks, machinery, tools, vehicles or industrial environments
- PPE, training and hearing conservation records if available
- statements from co-workers about noise exposure and communication difficulty
- medical records showing onset, progression and any non-work hearing history
Common insurer or report disputes
- the insurer says hearing loss is age-related
- noise exposure is understated because records are incomplete
- hearing protection is assumed to have prevented injury
- the report does not address all noisy employments
- tinnitus is mentioned but not connected to the assessment pathway
Report cautions before relying on the percentage
Report red flags
- The report says hearing protection was available without asking whether it was worn, fitted, replaced or practical for the task.
- A deduction is made for age or non-work noise without explaining the evidence.
- Tinnitus is mentioned but not integrated with the hearing-loss method.
- The worker’s full noisy employment history is missing, especially earlier trades, factories, transport or machinery work.
Method and reliance checks
- Were the audiograms current and technically reliable?
- Does the report identify noisy employments, machinery, tools, vehicles or industrial exposure over time?
- Are age-related or non-work deductions explained?
- Does the assessment method match the NSW hearing-loss pathway?
- Does the report separate measured hearing loss from the legally relevant occupational contribution?
- Were hearing protection and training records tested against what happened in practice?
- A worker’s difficulty hearing in conversation is important history, but the WPI opinion depends on measured hearing loss and causation.
- Incomplete employment history can understate occupational exposure.
- Hearing protection records should be tested against actual workplace practice rather than assumed to end causation.
Guideline notes
- NSW hearing impairment assessment has its own chapter and method.
- The guideline refers to AMA5 Chapter 11 and NAL Report No. 118.
Questions to ask when the report comes back
How this connects to thresholds and strategy
SIRA says permanent impairment compensation generally requires 11% or more permanent impairment for physical injury, and 15% or more for primary psychological injury. Secondary psychological injury is treated differently. Those thresholds are not a payout promise; they are eligibility and strategy checkpoints that need to be applied to the accepted injury and current evidence.
A low WPI opinion may also affect weekly-payment planning, treatment time-limit issues, dispute posture, and whether work injury damages threshold advice is required. The safest approach is to review the method, evidence and consequences before signing or letting the insurer rely on a weak assessment.
Questions workers often ask
Is hearing loss and tinnitus assessed the same way as every other injury?
No. NSW permanent impairment assessment depends on the accepted injury, body system, medical evidence, maximum medical improvement and any NSW-specific guideline modification. The assessment method for hearing loss and tinnitus should be checked against the injury actually accepted in the claim.
Can I calculate the WPI percentage myself?
No. A trained permanent impairment assessor must perform the assessment. A worker can still check whether the report used the correct injury description, records, body system, causation assumptions and deduction reasoning.
What if the insurer report seems too low?
Ask for the report and the material sent to the assessor. For hearing loss and tinnitus, compare the report against treating records, imaging, specialist material, work duties and certificates of capacity before accepting the percentage or relying on it for settlement strategy.
Does maximum medical improvement matter?
Yes. SIRA guidance says permanent impairment assessment should occur when the condition has stabilised and is unlikely to change substantially in the next year with or without treatment. If treatment is incomplete, the timing may need review.
General information only
This information is general in nature and is not legal advice. You should obtain advice about your own circumstances before relying on a WPI percentage, accepting a lump sum offer, or responding to an insurer decision.
Reviewed by NSW Work Injury Claims - a branch of Stephen Young Lawyers.
Related injury and impairment pages
Need a WPI assessment checked?
If the percentage does not match the accepted injury, treatment history, imaging, surgery, work duties or current restrictions, get the report checked before accepting the insurer position.