Can You Claim WSIB Benefits for Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Ontario?

What Is Noise-Induced Hearing Loss and Can WSIB Cover It?

Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a permanent, sensorineural hearing impairment caused by prolonged exposure to loud workplace noise. Yes, WSIB can cover it — but only when the hearing loss meets specific thresholds set out in WSIB policy and the audiogram shows a pattern consistent with occupational noise damage rather than ordinary aging.

The recent WSIAT decision, Decision No. 322/26, 2026 ONWSIAT 745 (CanLII) (https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onwsiat/doc/2026/2026onwsiat745/2026onwsiat745.html), illustrates how these technical requirements play out in practice — and how a denied claim can succeed on appeal.

What Did the WSIB Deny and Why?

The WSIB denied the claim because, after applying the age-related (presbycusis) adjustment, the worker’s calculated hearing loss fell below the 22.5 decibel threshold required for entitlement. The worker had worked as a shipper at a telecommunications company for 33 years and attributed his hearing loss to machinery noise. Despite the long exposure history, the WSIB concluded the numbers did not add up to entitlement.

The presbycusis adjustment works like this: for every year a worker is over age 60 at the time of the audiogram, 0.5 dB is deducted from the measured hearing loss. For a worker who is 70, that is a 5 dB reduction — which can push a borderline claim below the qualifying threshold.

How Did the Tribunal Reach a Different Result?

The Tribunal found that the original audiogram had been read correctly for one ear but not applied correctly across both ears. The worker’s left ear showed a hearing pattern consistent with NIHL — the characteristic dip at 4,000 Hz that audiologists associate with noise damage. The right ear showed a different pattern, more consistent with age-related loss.

Because there was no reason to think the worker’s right ear had less occupational noise exposure than the left, the Tribunal applied the left-ear values to both ears. After the presbycusis deduction, the adjusted average hearing loss came to exactly 22.5 dB — the minimum threshold for entitlement. The appeal was allowed.

Does a Worker Need Proof of Exact Noise Levels?

No — exact decibel records of workplace noise are not required. The WSIAT applies a ‘significant contributing factor’ standard: workplace noise must have been a cause of considerable importance, but it does not need to be the only cause. The Tribunal can infer equivalent exposure from the type of work and its duration.

In this case, there were no objective noise measurements from the shipping floor. The Tribunal nonetheless concluded that 33 years of exposure to machinery noise, even without precise records, was more likely than not equivalent to the continuous 90 dB threshold referenced in WSIB policy. Long service history matters.

What Happens When Two Audiologists Disagree?

Conflicting expert evidence is common in NIHL claims. Here, a later audiologist argued that the original 2014 audiogram contained errors and that her 2024 results should be used instead. The Tribunal rejected that argument for several reasons.

First, the 2024 audiogram did not show the 4,000 Hz notch pattern characteristic of NIHL — making it less useful for establishing occupational causation. Second, the worker had experienced an unrelated ear condition after the original audiogram, which could explain differences between the two sets of results. Third, WSIB practice is to use the audiogram closest in time to the last occupational noise exposure, because later tests can reflect non-work-related events. The Tribunal found no compelling reason to depart from that practice.

What Benefits Flow From an Initial Entitlement Finding?

An initial entitlement ruling from the WSIAT does not automatically set the dollar amount or duration of benefits. Those questions go back to the WSIB for further adjudication. The Tribunal’s role at this stage was limited to the threshold question: does the worker qualify at all? Once entitlement is established, the WSIB determines the specific compensation, which can include health care, rehabilitation, and hearing aids.

This two-step process is worth understanding if you are navigating a WSIB appeal. Winning at WSIAT on entitlement is a significant step, but it is the beginning of the compensation process, not the end.

Questions and Records to Discuss With a Lawyer

If you are dealing with a WSIB denial for hearing loss, the following points may be worth raising with our Ontario employment lawyers:

• What audiogram results does the WSIB have on file, and how close in time are they to your last day of noisy work?
• Has a presbycusis (age-related) deduction been applied, and if so, how was it calculated?
• Does the audiogram pattern show the characteristic 4,000 Hz notch associated with noise-induced hearing loss?
• Were you exposed to noise in both ears equally, and has the WSIB treated them the same way in its calculations?
• Are there employment records, co-worker statements, or other evidence that could support the noise-exposure history?

Workers in the Hamilton and Burlington areas dealing with occupational injury claims can also explore resources through our Hamilton employment law page.

If you have received a WSIB denial and believe the audiogram analysis may have been applied incorrectly, the team at UL Lawyers is available to discuss your circumstances. Reach out through /connect to start a conversation about your situation.

---

This article is automated commentary on a public court decision and is for general information only — not legal advice. Decisions rely on facts unique to each case. If you are affected by a similar issue, contact a lawyer for advice specific to your situation.