How would you word the legal policy on single sex spaces to exclude men?

Surely everyone has seen the signs about male cleaners in motorway services loos etc etc.

Men going about their legitimate work have never been a problem and still aren’t. This is a complete non-issue.

It’s about the provision of services. The plumber is there for a different reason. In my experience a sign or a person at the door warning that a man is present has sufficed.

This is completely irrelevant to the ruling

The law is already worded adequately in this regard: it talks about providing single sex services and plumbers etc. are not there to receive the service.

There are also provisions which allow employers to only employ women where needed.

How do you tie your shoes if you cannot think of a solution to this

This

honestly i have no idea why people are finding these things so difficult…to hear some talk you’d think that single sex provision is a brand new thing

I was in a supermarket toilet recently with my 8yo DD and a male member of staff came in, unannounced (I heard the door/footsteps so I was aware someone else had come in when I was in the cubicle) to undertake a facility check. I don't think this is unusual BUT it would have been nice to have a sign to say, "Facility checks / maintenance may be undertaken by both female or male staff members" as I got a bit of a shock when I went to wash my hands to find a hurly burly bloke topping up the loo roll and I wouldn't have wanted my DD to have encountered him by herself - which is why protecting SSS is so important.

These comments do smack of “if men can’t have these things, nobody can”.

there were no issues with managing any of these things until about 10 years ago when self ID was adopted.

Ask anyone older than about 20 how these things used to be managed.

Unless it’s a paramedic or police officer in an emergency, surely you’d know in advance if a male is visiting?

Most places they just put up a sign on the odd occasion there’s a man fixing something in a female-only space, then women can choose whether to enter, go elsewhere or wait.

If women are already in a space and a workman needs to go in (e.g. toilets), the man usually shouts to see if anyone’s in there, then waits until all the women are finished before putting a sign up and going in. Or they send a female staff member in to check if anyone’s in there and give the women the opportunity to choose whether they’re ok with the man coming in or whether he should wait.

This kind of thing happens all the time - we’re typically quite good at understanding the rules around single-sex spaces, especially the workmen who’ve been dealing with this stuff their whole careers. It’s not a new concept.

It's also so that if something goes wrong, the usual suspects can say "see, told you so, you brought on yourselves" or some such nonsense

Agree with you @NecessaryScene Some posters are making very heavy weather of hypothetical situations where we already have solutions or where one is easily found.

It feels like a deliberate attempt to make the SC’s simple, clear ruling (of the bleedin’ obvious) into something that will make navigating daily life more complex and onerous; it really won’t.

Exactly - you change the signage when it isn't single-sex. Same as you change signage or labelling whenever anything changes.

Come on, why is this so hard?

Put up as sign informing women if male service staff are present at that time.