Hearing Aids on Exit Seats (UK CAA)

[BOAC4ME]

Having had experience of this in the past, both professionally and personally (not me a family member), I would just like to ask people's opinion on the issue of whether or not a person with a hearing aid is acceptable to be sitting on an exit seat or not.

The CAA guidelines are quite clear, they state that an individual must not be seated on an exit seat if they are either "substantially blind or substantially deaf to the extent that they might not readily assimilate printed or verbal instructions given".

Now, I dont have any problem with that, Safety must be the first concern of any responsible airline. However, if someone uses a hearing aid and can hear perfectly well with it, when being asked security questions at check in, should they not be allowed to sit on exits, there are Airlines that do not permit this. Which again would be fine, but should this not then also apply to people who wear glasses?? As the principle is virtually the same.

The CAA say that their guidelines are just that, and Airlines are entitled to be more stringent if they wish, but in this crazy PC world, would there not be potential legal ramifications in relation to discrimination?

Just a thought, what is your opinion guys??

[PAXboy]

A good point. The question I would pose is: If, in sudden deceleration from an RTO or more complex arrival (insert your imagination here ...) what happens if the hearing and/or glasses fly off the head?

The person may not hear instructions or be able to read the sign to confirm action before opening the door or - critically - NOT opening the door if instructed by CC due to a problem outside the door. There is also the instruction: "Look through the small viewing window BEFORE opening the door and (if applicable) throwing it out."

So I might be inclined to interpret the guidelines to say NO hearing aids, glasses or contact lenses.

[BOAC4ME]

It appears we are thinking along the same lines PAXboy, I can understand an argument for all the above, but Airline professionals will testify to people being refused on the basis of hearing aids, but I would be shocked if even one would say the same for glasses, which must pose at least (if not more in my opinion, as glasses are much more likely to fly off someones head in your perfect example than hearing aid's) threat to safety whilst on an exit seat. Not consistant IMHO, by all means ban them all, but not just one.

[MathFox]

With glasses it depends on the eyesight with glasses off whether someone will be able to perform the evacuation duties. If the eye correction is only minor, there is little reason to deny a person an exit seat for just that.

[PAXboy]

Sure - but how do you know? If the pax knows that gaining an exit row seat is dependent on them answering the question "Is the correction on your glasses less than N?" with YES, then they will. If you don't want to check hearing and eyesight at the check-in desk, then make a simple blanket ruling.

But even if you did, I'll bet there are folks who would take their glasses off first and lie through their teeth. Sorry if that sounds harsh but paxing for 40+ years can leave a jaded feeling about travellers ...

[BOAC4ME]

Agreed Mathfox, but ditto for hearing aids. The reasoning is that if the hearing aid malfunctions then the pax will not be suitable, but also if the pax has his/her glasses knocked off, or frankly leaves them in the IDL, then the same applies. There are many varying degrees of reasons why someone would wear glasses, and there are many varying degress why someone would wear a hearing aid.

[MathFox]

You can make any rule with respect to hearing aids, glasses and such; I think that it is important that the cabin crew has some discretion to talk with the passengers in the exit row and reseat anyone they deem "not fit". I would not like to have drunk or drugged people there either.

[jetset lady]

I have been in this situation and having spoken to the passenger in question, been happy for him to sit by the exit. He was able to hear me perfectly well, despite my speaking fairly softly. As previously stated, glasses could also fly off during an incident. In fact, they are probably more likely to disappear than a hearing aid is. Switched on crew will use the emergency exit briefing as an opportunity to assess the passengers abilities to open the exits if needed, but, eventually, a certain amount of common sense and trust must come into the equation. If there is any doubt, they must reseat the passenger. Now, if only all crew were switched on, life would be perfect! ;)

[Bealzebub]

Yes it is as always a judgment call. Somebody using a hearing aid would not in my opinion warrant automatic exclusion from being seated next to an emergency exit. If the person met the general criteria and could hear reasonably well with an aid that would be fine. As has already been said somebody with corrective lenses would be considered suitable.

The persons seated at an exit should be prepared and able to assist in an evacuation should that be necessary. There is no guarantee that anybody sat in an exit seat would actually be able to perform if required, so it is only ever going to be a case of best judgment at a given time. A crewmember will be charged with the control of any given exit.

On the subject of glasses, most Captains over 45 will have developed some degree of presbyopia and require corrective lenses. They will certainly be qualified to sit at an exit, so that point becomes a bit moot.

[jimbeetle]

Yeah, this has to be situation dependent.

Though I think I hear perfectly fine, I got hearing aids about ten years ago when the Veterans folks on this side of the pond told me I needed them. An aircraft is one the the places that I can't wear them -- they're just too danged good. And they also don't play well with headphones or earbuds.

So, maybe instead of looking for the person with the hearing aid in, it might be best to speak to all folks in the exit row in a fairly soft voice in order to test them.

[Final 3 Greens]

"Is the correction on your glasses less than N?"

With quite a number of passengers, this question would most likely produce an answer of "Eh?"

And not because of their hearing aid. :}

[boardingpass]

if someone uses a hearing aid and can hear perfectly well with it

They're fine to sit there then! I know a Capt who uses a hearing aid.

[radeng]

Safety briefings say electronic equipment should be switched off........they never mention leaving hearing aids (and pacemakers!) and for that matter, watches, on.

A somewhat more complex situation these days when hearing aids and pacemakers have radio transmitters in them.....

[Eboy]

Glasses and hearing aids can perform a protective function in an emergency. Glasses protect the eyes from sharp fragments and impact that could blind others. Hearing aids block very loud sounds that could leave others temporarily deaf.

[biffo1963]

Just to muddy the waters even further, I have bilateral ( £1 in the big words box) hearing aids and I would agree with previous posters who said that they are less likely to come flying off than a pair of specs. But then I have the NHS behind-the-ear type with the custom-made moulds to fit my ears; someone with a pair of in-the-ear aids would probably take an entirely different view, and check-in staff or CC would be less likely to spot these aids in the first place.

However I will admit that the only people likely to spot my hearing aids are those who are operating the security scanners, since they are most likely to be in my pocket. I almost never wear my aids in the airport and definitely don't wear them in the aircraft - far too much noise already thank you, and as someone else pointed out they don't go very well with ear-buds ! :O

John

[BOAC4ME]

MathFox, I am 100% in favour of Cabin Crew and Ground Staff discretion in relation to this issue, I suppose really that is the basis of my question really. I dont have an issue with a member of staff deciding on an individual basis that an individual is not suitable for an ABP seat (even with a hearing aid, if their hearing imparement is severe enough), what i dont understand is a blanket rule for hearing aids and not for other similar 'inflictions'.

In relation to PAX who are drunk or under the influence of drugs, they are not only not permitted to sit on exit seats, but should not be allowed to board the flight AT ALL, regardless of where they are sat, those regulations are very clear and are 100% correct.