Submission from National Association of Deafened People (NADP) (AST0033)

 

  1. The National Association of Deafened People is a nationwide charity run by its members who are deafened. Our members have experienced hearing loss to varying degrees during their lifetimes. Some have had a hearing loss since birth or early childhood, others may have become deafened suddenly during adulthood. Many share a gradually deteriorating hearing loss with age. Our members have a wide ranging experience of using hearing aids and many have been fitted with Cochlear Implants. Our membership includes people of working age and those who have experienced deafness during their working lifetime. In our responses to the questions raised we have attempted to incorporate the views and practical experiences of our members.  Communication is the main barrier to a deafened person’s employment success in terms of retaining and obtaining employment but also maximising their potential. Sadly it is in all three of these areas that our members have suffered. We welcome the opportunity to respond to the questions raised by the Work and Pensions Committee enquiry into Assistive Technology.

 

 

Overview

 

  1. It is our view that Assistive Technology has a place both within the existing Access to Work structure and as a prelude to an Access to Work application. We believe that by identifying areas of Assistive Technology that could benefit all deafened people in the workplace and making these readily available to all, not only will this result in a wider take up by potential users but also it could improve the cost effectiveness of the Access to Work scheme. However, for this to be effective deafened people need to be involved in both the development and testing of new technology and offered flexibility to try different solutions with and without the direct support of Access to Work. There is no one size fits all.

 

  1. We believe Assistive Technologies have an important role to play both now and in the future to provide greater equality in the workplace. Not everyone who could benefit from these solutions is or would be an applicant for Access to Work. We would like to suggest the following potential suggestions for further consideration by the working party for funding, development and support:-

 

 

We discuss these suggestions further in our response below.

 

Assistive Devices

 

  1. There is a common perception amongst the population that hearing aids and cochlear implants give back one’s full hearing. This is a fallacy. It is essential that complementary assistive listening devices are utilised to maximise the effectiveness of a hearing device, be it a hearing aid or cochlear implant processor. Assistive listening devices are essential elements of this armoury but are unlikely to be offered as part of the provision of the hearing aids on NHS while are offered for cochlear implants processors. An example could be a portable microphone that can be linked wirelessly to a hearing device and placed close to the speaker. We believe assistive listening devices that are part of offering with specific hearing aid should be made available either for free or a minimal charge as a result of the cost effective savings by the NHS. This is especially important for those who are not at work and cannot obtain assistive listening device via Access to Work. Such move could greatly increase confidence of the deafened person and allow them to try and test what works best for them in different everyday situations prior to applying for jobs or ATW.

 

  1. There are various forms of alerting devices available that are utilised by deafened people in the workplace. Typically these are provided under Health and Safety regulations rather than Access  to Work but it is essential that the solutions are joined up to encourage inter-compatibility. For example a pager system could link to fire alarm and telephone ringer. Furthermore, increasingly alerting devices are being developed to link to other technology such as smart phones and include additional features such as temperature warnings, movement sensors, etc, which could be useful for a deafened person.

 

  1. Deafened people should be encouraged to utilise assistive technology in all areas of their lives. Where they find a solution works at home then they should be encouraged to bring this solution to work and vice versa. However, often employers apply a blanket policy ban on outside technology which discourages its use. The government could encourage the development of safe lists and promote companies offering solutions that are safe at work.

 

 

 

 

Telephone Relay services

 

  1. Assistive Technology should not only focus on enhancing the sense of hearing which in many cases is irreparable but also utilise an individual’s other senses. For example many deafened people use subtitles on the television to complement their hearing in full or part. It therefore makes sense for subtitles to be offered for telephone conversations. However, the current Telephone Relay services available in the U.K. known as Next Generation Text Relay, whilst focussing on the needs of the minority of deafened people who are unable to use their voice, sadly fails to accommodate the vast majority who prefer to use their own voice and want to converse at a speed consistent with their peers, and not to have it interspersed with silences as the text attempts to catch up. Furthermore with the Next Generation Text Relay Service it is so difficult to use to receive a call that the majority of deafened people we have surveyed do not feel comfortable receiving phone calls using this service. This is further complicated by the fact that an incoming call may or may not be through the Text Relay Service. Whilst other forms of communication have developed over the years so that telephone calls are less frequent, phone conversations remain an essential part of most forms of employment. It is therefore essential that technology is utilised to ensure deafened people are able to communicate in an equivalent manner and speed to their peers.

 

  1. We are aware that other western countries such as US, Australia, New Zealand and France offer other forms of telephone relay services such as Captioned Telephone Relay Services which offers conversation speeds of 160 words per minute compared to Text Relay in U.K. of 60-80 words per minute. The lack of a Captioned Telephony Relay Service in the U.K. is, in the view of our members, a significant barrier to them reaching their employment potential.

 

  1. We believe it would be more progressive if telephone relay services were centrally funded possibly through a levy on Communication Providers. This would encourage a competitive environment for relay providers.   We are aware that Communication Providers would be receptive to his idea if they are able to charge businesses for access to this service in compliance with their obligations under the Equality Act. We hope the working party recognises that this set up could potentially reduce the communication support required through Access to Work.

 

Speech to Text Reporting (STTR) / Remote Captioning

 

  1. NADP, along with its members, is very reliant on utilising both Stenographers and Palantypists, together known as Speech to Text Reporters or STTRs, as communication support professionals for meetings and conferences. It is increasingly recognised that speech recognition at some stage will improve sufficiently to replace the need for human intervention to provide speech to text. In the meantime, there is  an increasing use of “revoicing” where a trained individual repeats conversation into trained voice recognition software to provide text. This is the main method currently used for live subtitles on BBC news programs.

 

  1. As internet connectivity and reliability has improved there has been an increase in the availability of text provided remotely either through STTR or revoicing, known as Remote Captioning; the reporter listens in to the conversation from another location and provides text to an individual’s device. Remote Captioning has the potential to support more deafened people remotely and we have seen its incorporation in other technologies such as Skype Business, Adobe Connect and Go to Meeting and directly via a dedicated internet portal. However, Remote Captioning is not suitable in all situations and we are concerned that due to its lower cost relative to STTR that it may appear more attractive due to cost. In addition, in our experience revoicing is currently not as accurate or as fast as STTR, and we believe direct comparisons should be possible by deafened people through independent measures of speed and accuracy.

 

  1. Remote Captioning also relies on a good and reliable internet connection to enable simultaneous and continuous flow of speech and text. It should not be the responsibility of the deafened individual to ensure this connectivity so an employer needs to take responsibility to ensure this access. With good checks on all points and availability of IT support on hand, the service can be a useful addition to communication support availability and to enable deafened people to progress in their jobs.

 

  1. Quality communication is essential for all people in employment in each and every situation they are in and as such deafened people need to be able to choose which method of communication best meets their needs in each scenario. We believe the government could support the training of Speech to Text Reporters working with deaf employees to increase the availability of this quality and essential service for deafened people.

 

Corporate Audio Visual messages/On line training

 

  1. Over recent years technology developments have led to companiesbroadcastingcorporate messages via online videos. Often this material is not subtitled at source which results in deafened people losing out on these key corporate messages which impacts on their ability to engage with their employer’s objectives. This may lead to misperceptions of their commitment, which can impact on their progress. Similarly, there is an increasing use of online training for which the content is rarely subtitled. We believe there is a role for Assistive Technology in providing this access to ensure a level playing field at work. More focus could be made in supporting developments in this technology and ensuring companies are made responsible for making this content accessible. However, despite the availability of voice recognition software which can be used to provide automated captions, the experience of our members is that these can vary in quality. As such we suggest corporations are made responsible for ensuring the captions provided accurately reflect the audio.

 

Promoting and encouraging best practice

 

  1. We recognise that it would be difficult to police any proposed requirement by companies to provide accessibility and that there is a reliance on the Equality Act for individuals to address any failings.. We also recognise that it is not the role of Access to Work to report on potential breaches of the Equality Act. However, the current arrangement does not provide confidence to individuals to pursue cases through the Employment Tribunal due to the impact on their career. We believe the government needs an independent body to investigate claims of breaches of the Equality Act on an informal and anonymous basis to encourage employers to proactively make adjustments to accommodate the needs of their deafened workforce.

 

  1. There is an abundance of applications available on a variety of devices that could be utilised by deafened people to enhance their communication at work, however there is currently no central resource in place to communicate their availability or offer practical reviews. The Government could offer a central platform to disseminate knowledge of these applications and support those that offer the most potential to assist deafened people.

 

  1. We believe the government could encourage the development of more applications which could enhance the effectiveness of a deafened person’s hearing device in the workplace. These applications could be used to set the device specific to different work scenarios such as group meetings, social events, conference phones, etc. This could be used to complement the tuning of their aids by their hearing professional in real life situations.

 

  1. Whilst we recognise there are good and bad employers in terms of ensuring accessibility, we believe there is a significant number of employers who are simply unaware of what simple actions they could take to ensure their employees are able to accommodate their hearing loss as they age. We suggest the working party considers setting up a forum of employers and deaf charities which shares good practice and new developments for the benefit of the workforce to ensure that people feel more comfortable accepting their hearing loss and seeking assistance to ensure they can reach their potential.

 

  1. The Equality Act requires Employers to anticipate reasonable adjustments that may be required for its Employees rather than wait for these to be suggested by an employee. However, in the experience of our members, it is extremely rare for this requirement to be enforced in practice without implications for an individual’s career progression. We believe the working party could publicise good working practice by employers in supporting deafened employees which would act as an example for other employers and ultimately provide a benchmark against which employees could request similar adjustments. This could potentially ensure that Assistive Technology is utilised within the workplace at a faster pace and encourage future developments to enhance deafened people’s working experience.

 

  1. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss all or part of our submission in greater detail should this be of interest to the committee.

 

 

January 2018