The Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJ) has endorsed the refusal of the National Social Security Institute (INSS) to recognize a permanent partial disability to a supermarket cashier who is totally deaf. Justice understands that, despite the severity of his illness, he can perform his functions normally thanks to the use of hearing aids.
The sentence was handed down in February and responds to the appeal of the affected person, ratifying the previous ruling of the Social Court number 7 of Barcelona. The affected worker, 50 years old (born in 1976), was a supermarket cashier and requested in February 2022 to have a permanent partial disability recognized.
This benefit requires, as can be seen in the web of Social Security, which proves a decrease of at least 33% in work performance without preventing the development of normal activity.
Deafness with progressive worsening since 2017
The medical reports presented by the worker indicate that she suffers from severe bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, which has been evolving for a long time and has worsened since 2017. This causes a 100% hearing loss and since December 2021 she has been using hearing aids in both ears.
According to the ruling, the magistrates considered that thanks to these devices, he could maintain conversations without problem, and in this way he communicates in his work environment even if he has specific limitations such as, for example, reading the lips of someone wearing a mask.
The functions he performs in his position, such as product collection, customer service, cash handling or transaction registration, have a “medium-low” hearing requirement, that is, a “level 2 out of 4” so he is compatible with maintaining conversations in a normal voice.
Regarding the physical requirements of her job, ruling 1041/2026 indicates that they are moderate efforts and routine tasks that “are not substantially affected by the worker’s pathology.”
Recognition of permanent disability depends on its impact on work
The TSJC insists that the recognition of permanent disability does not depend only on the medical diagnosis but also on the impact it has on work. In this case, it has been concluded that the limitations are not serious enough and that they do not significantly reduce performance, nor do they hinder the essential tasks of the position.
For this reason, the 33% threshold required by law to grant permanent partial disability is not reached. The worker alleged that she has a recognized degree of disability of 41%, an argument that the magistrates ruled out.
The ruling indicates that administrative disability does not automatically imply work incapacity since the latter requires assessing professional performance.