Howard Leight Vs110N Verishield Black Behind The Neck Earmuff NRR 22 1035112 Vs Review

Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, WC Safety earns from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. Commissions do not influence our review.

Reviewed by Steven Eaton, WC Safety Editorial

The Howard Leight VS110N VeriShield NRR 22 Behind-the-Neck Ear Muffs (Passive, Dielectric) — 1035112-VS is a earmuffs from HOWARD, listed on Amazon. This review restates what the product page documents, places it in its hearing protection lane, and points to the ranked guides for the head-to-head field.

What the Product Page Documents

Published July 16, 2026 · Last updated July 27, 2026

Editorial assessment by Steven Eaton, WC Safety editor, based on published HOWARD specifications and category fit. We did not laboratory-test this product.

The Howard Leight VS110N VeriShield (1035112-VS) is a passive behind-the-neck ear muff rated NRR 22 (ANSI S3.19-1974). The neckband routes behind the head rather than over the crown, which clears the space a hard hat, welding helmet, or face-shield headgear needs — making it a practical choice where a standard over-the-head muff simply will not seat. The VeriShield neckband design is also dielectric (non-conductive), so it is suited to electrical, utility, and arc-welding environments where metal-banded muffs are a hazard.

This is a passive muff : there is no Bluetooth, no AM/FM radio, no microphone, and no sound amplification. It blocks noise mechanically through its cushioned cups and seals — nothing to charge, pair, or replace batteries on. If you specifically want electronic sound-restoration or radio features, see our electronic ear muffs ; for straightforward block-the-noise protection, this VeriShield is built for it.

Where It Earns Its Slot

Where it earns its slot: Editorial assessment by Steven Eaton, WC Safety editor, based on published HOWARD specifications and category fit. We did not laboratory-test this product.. Everything below measures the product against that role: its honest limits, its true alternatives, and where the linked guides rank it.

Honest Limits

The boundaries are the usual ones for hearing protection: the rating assumes a full, correct seat, and the seal is the first thing daily wear degrades. Plan the NRR 22 label at roughly 7.5 dB of field reduction under OSHA's subtract-7-and-halve estimate, and let your measured exposure — not the box — decide whether it is enough. Where the derated number still clears 85 dBA, dual protection takes over.

Pros and Cons

Alternatives in the Same Lane

• Howard Leight Laser Lite LL-1 Cordless Earplugs — NRR 32
• Howard Leight Maximum Max-1 Cordless Earplugs — NRR 33
• Howard Leight Quiet QD1 Cordless Earplugs, NRR 26 (Reusable
• Howard Leight Maximum Lite Cordless Earplugs, LPF-1 NRR 30 (
• Howard Leight X-TREME XTR-1 NRR 32 ear plugs (Uncorded, Disp
• Howard Leight TrustFit Pod Earplugs, NRR 28 Cordless Push-In
• Howard Leight FirmFit FF-1 Earplugs, NRR 30 Cordless Foam (F
• Howard Leight Multi Max MM-1 Cordless Earplugs — NRR 31
• 3M PELTOR Optime 105 H10A Ear Muffs - NRR 30 Over-the-Head H

Hearing Protection Guides

• Best Ear Plugs for Construction
• Best Ear Muffs for Construction
• When Do You Need Hearing Protection?
• Best Noise-Canceling Headsets
• Construction Site PPE Guide

Browse by Category

• Hearing Protection
• Ear Muffs
• Foam Ear Plugs
• Corded Ear Plugs
• Shooting Hearing Protection
• PPE Care & Accessories

Frequently Asked Questions

General questions about ratings, OSHA limits and fit are answered in the Best Ear Plugs for Construction guide.

The Bottom Line

Rated 4.5/5 on documented spec, configuration, and value. The Howard Leight VS110N VeriShield NRR 22 Behind-the-Neck Ear Muffs (Pass does the job its listing describes — the guides above tell you whether it's the right pick against the field.

Common questions

What field number should a written program plan on?

Plan on roughly 7.5 dB: OSHA's enforcement estimate subtracts 7 dB from the NRR 22 label and halves the remainder. Compare that figure against your measured 8-hour average — and where the result still exceeds 85 dBA, dual protection (plugs under muffs) takes over, not a higher label.

What quietly kills an earmuff's protection?

Cushions and clamp: seals harden and crack with age and solvents, and the headband's spring relaxes until the cups merely rest on the head. Replace cushion kits on schedule, and treat weak clamp force as retirement — the shell outlives the parts that make it work.

When do I need plugs AND muffs together?

Once OSHA's derating still leaves the measured average above 85 dBA. Plugs worn under muffs are the standard escalation — the combination generally buys about 5 dB over the better single device — and past that point the fix is engineering controls, not shopping.

What does the Howard Leight VS110N VeriShield NRR 22 Behind-the-Neck Ear M listing actually document?

Editorial assessment by Steven Eaton, WC Safety editor, based on published HOWARD specifications and category fit. We did not laboratory-test this product.…

What are the alternatives to the Howard Leight VS110N VeriShield NRR 22 Behind-the-Neck Ear M?

The sibling earmuffs options linked in this review, ranked head-to-head in the hearing protection guides below — start with the buyer's guides for the field view.

Sources. Requirements referenced here come from OSHA 29 CFR 1910 and the NIOSH recommendations. Where a consensus standard governs, the ANSI document is named in the text.

Related reference

Related reading in this area: 3m peltor h505b welding earmuffs nrr 22 behind the head, peltor optime 101 h7b review: nrr 26 behind-the-head, 3m peltor optime 95 h6b earmuffs nrr 21 behind-the-head, 3m folding earmuff noise reduction rating nrr 25 db adjustable ear, moldex pura-fit vs howard leight max-1: which nrr 33 ear plug?, and howard leight impact sport vs impact pro: which electronic ear muff?.

Why trust WC Safety

WC Safety is an independent, affiliate-supported review site. It is not a retailer: it holds no inventory, takes no orders, and earns only from qualifying purchases through clearly marked links — which never changes what a product is rated to do. Standards language is taken from the regulation text directly, and ratings are reported as the manufacturer publishes them. We run no laboratory and perform no testing of our own. Where published sources disagree, we say so and plan on the conservative figure rather than the flattering one.

Our methodology

Figures come from the regulation and the published specification, in that order. Derated numbers are calculated, not estimated. Nothing here is presented as a measured result, because we measure nothing.

Researched and written by Steven Eaton, editor of WC Safety. Steven holds no safety certification and does not test products; this page compares what manufacturers and regulators publish, with the gaps in that record marked. Last reviewed August 2026.