Add Your Idea

Lift Restrictions on Unisex Toilets

5 Comments 21st June 2016

There are several regulations under HASAWA and elsewhere that restrict or prohibit unisex toilets in workplaces and public buildings, including entertainment venues. Properly managed unisex toilets make possible more flexible use of facilities.

 

 

Why does this matter?

In public buildings the toilet facilities for  the audience are regulated mostly by building and licensing regulations, and often leads to long queues at one gender’s toilet  while another is under used. For example Wembley Arena stages heavy metal concerts (predominantly male audience) and ice dancing (mostly female audience) the Gents has queues at the first, the Ladies at the second. Unisex toilets would mean less queuing.

In the workplace, the major regulatory barrier to installing unisex toilets is the Health & Safety Management Regulations. Unisex toilets in the workplace are not uncommon in other countries. (Remember Ali Mc Beal?) and if properly managed can provide better facilities for all concerned.

A barrier to increasing diversity in areas traditionally dominated by one gender is lack of facilities for the minority gender. This could easily be solved by introducing properly managed unisex facilities.

In older buildings with male and female toilets on alternate floors, conversion to unisex facilities can put local (and more accessible) toilets closer to everyone. In buildings with male and female toilets on every floor, unisex toilets can reduce the amount of space taken up by toilets, or make more generous facilities available to everyone.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 3.00 out of 5)

Highlighted posts


5 Responses to Lift Restrictions on Unisex Toilets

  1. Roy says:

    This is more than a good idea, it is common sense, particularly in smaller scale premises used by different groups at different times and where gender mix varies from all male to all female – and every combination in between. We don’t have separate toilets in our homes, so why anywhere else?.

  2. Kayli says:

    Bad idea. All it would take was one predator and a vulnerable party who find themselves alone for a moment for it to all go horribly wrong. Seperate toilets have always been in place with protecting the physical wellbeing and dignity of the vulnerable at mind. To undo this would be like asking for for a rise in sex crimes.

  3. Jacob Grande says:

    Kayli is overlooking one thing, a sexual predator is not physically barred from entering the toilets of the opposite gender if they so desire. A separate toilet is no obstacle. There is no problem with unisex toilets, as long as there is secure locking facilities from within each cubicle for safety.

  4. G.Squire. says:

    OK if the immediately adjacent area is busy and light but may be intimidating to a lady if in a dark alley or remote location.

  5. Helen Cheetham says:

    Excellent idea when well planned and instigated. Like all change it needs to be applied in appropriate situations not just rolled out everywhere with no thought as to suitability.
    Would be very helpful in our village hall.

Leave a Reply to Jacob Grande Cancel reply

Good idea? Bad idea? Let us know your thoughts.


Back to top
Add Your Idea