Kelly v Leonardo Employment Tribunal Thread 4

When people said I wonder why the government are taking so long to implement this, I did think about all these loo configurations and who is responsible and the problems with devolution.

In the case of schools, the DfE was repeatedly telling me all schools also should be following 1974 legislation (that the 1992 legislation was based on) so its the schools responsibility not theirs for health and safety in toilets.

If non-domestic venues and offices had followed building standards this wouldn’t be so much of a problem. At least in England, publishing Document T has made everyone aware that if you refurbish toilets or have a new building, the main provision is single sex. There’s no excuse. As I have said before, try asking Kemi Badenoch what she meant by single sex toilets, when she introduced Document T to the public.

Yes to the poo doors - all the female stuff hated using them.

The school I teach in, has traditional, single sex toilets, with cubicles and basins in the same room.
One (the boys) has had the door to the corridor taken off, because the boys used to keep punching holes through the wall, so that they could look into the girls toilets.

There was talk that this set of toilets was going to be made mixed sex, as the MAT demanded we had a set, but our Headmaster put the final veto on that, as a Biology teacher. We're seeing far few trans identify children (mostly NB autistic girls now), since the Headmaster made it clear that the changing rooms and toilets would stay single sex.

Just looping out into a different angle

the whole "not many women in the company" and "only one woman complained"

would that wash if it was
"not many black people in the company" and "only one black person complained"

thought not

I think, but I’m not willing to bet my house on it, the visitors centre at Delamere Forest in Cheshire, last time I visited ( back in Spring so it might be different now) I’m pretty sure they’ve got single sex loos but mixed sex hand washing.
You go through an open door and it’s males to the left, females to the right, but as you come out it’s mixed sex sinks.

Sorry re-read - school regs not workplace regs! Haven’t read them in full.

I’m not sure I agree that you can decouple single sex toilets from handwashing provision.

The single sex area needs to have a main door or private entrance that leads into a room with toilet cubicles. Per the regulations and guidance.

If sinks are within this area it is a single sex area. A random man can’t walk into the toilet room to access a sink because it’s a mixed sex sink.

Another one relevant to this case. Edinburgh does seem to be the epicentre of loo cases:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jz5ed7lv5o.amp

Why do children get single sex loos but adults don’t?

Here’s a thread about a workplace with single user full height doored cubicles and a mixed sex washing area:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5379551-unisex-toilets-in-new-office-dread-going-into-work?postsby=SocialMol

”Yes this is what it is - cubicles are floor to ceiling and then you exit to the sinks in the shared area”

Lockable is, as ever, subjective. I also think there’s grounds for discrimination against girls and those medically vulnerable with private cubicles. With 1 rape per day reported in a British school and Ofsted saying to schools you have to assume peer on peer sexual abuse is happening, I think mixed sex private cubicles should not be a standard design. The sinks could be argued too.

There used to be one school unisex toilet. It was designed to be at the entrance. Ideally situated near reception so it could be kept an eye on. This is when people put health and safety first. We have known the problems for years - it’s commonsense.

It will be assessed and if appeal to be heard scheduled. Would be a way off.

Whilst I would agree that there should be separate washing areas, the regulations clearly do not require that. They say that schools must provide:

• suitable toilet and washing facilities for the sole use of pupils
• separate toilets for boys and girls aged over 8 unless the toilet is in a lockable room for use by one pupil at a time

Given that the regulation clearly differentiates between toilets and washing areas, with no requirement for washing areas to be single sex, I would expect the courts to find that a communal mixed-sex washing area with individual, lockable rooms containing toilets was in compliance.

In The DfE non statutory School output specification School-specific brief: mainstream schools, some of the questions the school rep has to answer:
>if the school requires single sex or unisex toilets
>if the school has a specific requirement (with justifiable reasons) to not have the standard floor to ceiling cubicle systems
>What is the School’s ethos on supervision/privacy

Which means a school has to justify toilet door/partition gaps. In a school of around 1200 pupils there be around a dozen pupils that may sometimes have seizures, several more that have hypos and those with heart conditions. There will be those that have a one off seizure due to fever or drugs, girls who faint due to endometriosis and heavy periods or miscarriage. Many autoimmune and neurological conditions start in adolescence so many will be undiagnosed. There will be pupils that self harm in toilets. Girls who need toilet paper passing to them because of heavy periods.

If you are a teacher for several years all the above will not be news so I am at a loss as to why this was done. It goes against a wonderful government scheme that ensured all schools have a defibrillator because it is recognised pupils collapse and they have a chance of saving a life if used quickly enough.

However, the DfE have told me they do not hold risk assessments or equality impact statements for their designs in their department. They could not give me them.

Luckily it’s ‘guidance’. Many schools do not follow it.

Schools’ reasons to use these full height systems is often given as ‘inclusivity’. The DfE reason given for full height cubicles was because of phone cameras. This will be boys taking photos of girls because the toilets were mixed sex. Now what is happening is that boys are setting up hidden cameras in these mixed sex toilets instead because they are allowed to be there and it’s private. Teachers can’t tell who and how many are in the toilet cubicles and what they are doing. Boys have done revolting things to sanitary bins and free sanitary items which girls would never do.

Back to this judgement.

The judge doesn’t have to look very far from the location in this case to find lots of instances of toilet misuse and design problems in the workplace. I wonder what an inquiry will say about the poor man in the Edinburgh Council office toilets who died. I don’t know what the toilet design was in the Scottish Parliament where the MP put in a hidden camera but I would be more surprised if it wasn’t a floor to ceiling one. Hidden cameras are commonplace now and a private unisex space with vents for the mechanical ventilation needed, dryers, sinks to hide them is ideal.

Male behaviour is dictating non-domestic toilet design. It negatively affects the health and safety of the medically vulnerable, children and women the most.

So we're probably looking around begining of April before it is heard.

Trying that again with my glasses on so I can see what I'm typing!

Later. Six week to say you want to appeal, then they have to find a slot in the court diary and give both sides time to prep. It will be months, not weeks.

Later. Six week tonsaybyou want to appeal, then they have to finanslot in the court diary and give both sides time to prep. Months

Poo Doors!

What's the latest figures on sexual assaults in school toilets?

Haven't the been increasing?

It's almost as if people can't add 2+2 and have it equal 4, because they are too busy shouting "won't you think of 5's feelings?"

Sorry, quote fail - that was about having to go through fire doors to reach a sink.

That's deeply unhygienic.

And would the appeal be heard within that time frame or at a later date?

It is not legal for there to be mixed sex toilets and washrooms for children over the age of 8.

But that arrangement is not what is required. There must be also separate washing areas.

I think the parties have 42 days, or six weeks from receiving judgment to file an appeal.

They do, unless the provision is in the form of lockable rooms for one person to use at a time. The non-statutory guidance from the DfE is worded in such a way that it appears to allow a setup where you have toilets in individual, lockable, secure enclosures with full height doors leading to a communal mixed sex washing area.

Regarding sound sensors: imagining farting and reception pipes up ‘are you ok?’. It’s supposed to be certain ‘noises’ that trigger it off.