Participação de fonoaudiólogos nos processos trabalhistas indenizatórios relacionados à perda auditiva induzida por ruído

Abstract

Introduction: Workers exposed to noise can develop noise-induced hearing loss over the years, with auditory and non-auditory effects. That is why worker, bached by the Law, often sues his employer. The labor judge, during the judicial process, appoints an expert to give his opinion and identify a possible causal link between the disease and the work performed. The speech therapist is one of the professionals qualified to act as an expert in legal proceedings. Objective: To analyze the participation of the speech therapist in the formation of the conviction of judges in the judgments of labor legal proceedings with claims for compensation for noise-induced hearing loss. Methods: Descriptive study on the formation of the conviction of magistrates in their sentences, therefore, of the documentary type by public research with the websites of the TRTs in Brazil, with a quantitative and qualitative approach, between January 2015 to December 2020, respectively through statistical inferences and content analysis of the decisions that judged claims for damages by Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. The sentences analyzed were those handed down by first-degree magistrates (Judges of Labor) of the Regional Labor Courts in digital and public judicial processes, on the respective TRTs websites. Results: It was possible to find cases in 20 of the 24 Brazilian Labor Courts, with a total of 91 labor lawsuits being analyzed. The professional most nominated as an expert was the doctor, in 84 cases. The participation of speech therapists as experts occurred in only five cases. When analyzing the causal link/nexus in 88 of the 91 cases, 47 sentences show that the causal link is correlated with the audiological tests and other documents prior to the process joined by the parties. Also in 47 cases, the characterization of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in the worker approached its concept based on the literature, expert conclusions and tests gathered. The examinations and documents produced by the speech therapists in their activities, when presented in the process, were fundamental to convince the judges. Conclusion: The participation of speech therapists as judicial experts is low, but the exams and documents produced them in their activities, when presented in the process, are fundamental for convincing judges in the search for a causal link between Noise-Induced Hearing Loss and the worker's activities.