Physical Requirements.. Surely not?

GwylimT

haras_nosirrah wrote: »

Older children not so much as an issue as they can be more trusted and also adapt their behaviour (e.g assist a lip reading teacher through looking at them and speaking slowly and annunciating clearly) try getting a 4 year old to do that

As someone who is hearing impaired, it is very easy to get a four year old to do that, two year olds and three year olds are just as easy too.

haras_nosirrah

4 year olds who have grown up with a hearing impaired parent - maybe

20 4 year olds with a class teacher?

torbrex

gunsandbanjos wrote: »

How old were the class? There was a blind lecturer at my university and that didn't cause any issues.

However this case specifically relates to a nursery role, so ages 0-4? Different kettle of fish altogether.

11 and 12

gunsandbanjos

torbrex wrote: »

11 and 12

That's much more doable, my daughter is 12 and I can imagine her class would be fine with a blind teacher.

gunsandbanjos

What are the chances the OP is ever returning to this thread?

They're probably too busy firing off irate emails about discrimination in the workplace.

Savvy_Sue

When I was running an afterschool club, we had an application from a profoundly deaf young person who wanted to be a playworker.

I insisted that we should interview them rather than reject them outright.

However, we decided that we couldn't allow them to be one of the 1:8 ratio of staff:children. And as we couldn't afford to pay an extra staff member, all we could offer was voluntary work so that they could see how they got on (and so could we).

They would not have heard the fire alarm if it went off; they would not have been able to hear the phone when it rang; they would not have been able to make a phone call. Children usually had to repeat themselves before they could hear what was being said, colleagues too.

So I see no problem with the requirements. And for 'normal', I'd suggest that if you can function in day to day society without having to apologise for not hearing what's said multiple times a day, your hearing falls within the normal range - even if you need a hearing aid to achieve that!

Hasbeen

IrKirsty wrote: »

Hi All,

I have just requested an application pack for a Nursery Assistant job in a school. Upon reading the person specification I have found under the Phdyical Requirments that it states you need "normal hearing with or without adaptations" and "normal vision with or without adaptations".
Surely that's breaching some kind of discrimination law? I'm in the right mind to email back asking them to define normal!!
As someone who currently works in the SEN sector stuff like this infuriates me as not only does it discriminate against the individuals but the lack of exposure to young people is what causes a lot of ignorance, expected much more from a school :mad:

Sorry have to agree with others, would not like someone with a severe attitude problem!

Or to be truthful any one who is completely blind and deaf put in a position that they are responsible for the care of vulnerable people / children.

Or to be politically correct, Vision impaired and Hearing impaired? or has that changed to challenged? Sorry if wrong it changes so much.

Would also think people in that situation would not even apply for these?

Wayne_O_Mac

torbrex wrote: »

In what way does it discriminate against anyone to ask if they can see or hear with or without aids?

I wasn't aware that aids affected the sight or hearing, I understood it primarily affected the immune system.

JJG

Wayne_O_Mac wrote: »

I wasn't aware that aids affected the sight or hearing, I understood it primarily affected the immune system.

Sight aids are things like spectacles and contact lenses. Hearing aids are obviously hearing aids.


What you are talking about is AIDS, all in capitals.

Dan-Dan

I think Wayne was trying to `make a funny`