Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Is my employer right about single-sex workplace toilets and changing rooms?

43 replies

Isthiscorrect123 · 13/08/2026 14:29

I've just seen an announcement on my work's intranet and honestly I don't know if what they're saying is correct or not, but either way it's disappointing that they have chosen to disregard women's safety.

They say the Code of Practice for single sex spaces applies to public facilities only, not those in the workplace so staff should use the toilets, changing rooms etc that match their gender identity.

They say this is a deliberate decision because they value LGBTQ+ staff. Of course all staff should be valued, but I'm annoyed that they're force teaming LGB with T on this issue, as people who are lesbian, gay or bisexual don't want access to opposite sex toilets (unless they're also trans) but by putting them together like that anyone who objects will likely be accused of being homophobic, rather than just having a justified fear of males in spaces where women may be vulnerable. Also, by allowing men to access women's spaces they're showing they don't value female staff.

We're told that if anyone raises any concerns to stay calm and state the company position.

The thing is, this doesn't directly affect me, this is a huge company with many different sites. Where I work is very small with very few staff and we just have a single toilet. I've been to some of the larger sites before for training before, but most training now is online so I'm unlikely to visit them again.

And because it doesn't directly affect me I don't know how or if I could raise the issue. It's just now I know I work for a company that has made a deliberate decision to put men's wants above women's needs, and doesn't care about women's safety or dignity.

Are they correct that workplace single sex spaces don't really need to be single sex?

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Fafafabienne · 15/08/2026 08:48

Good luck OP. I have a hunch that you’re not the only one in this position.

CassOle · 15/08/2026 00:14

Isthiscorrect123 · 15/08/2026 00:03

I am thinking about doing that, but I think an anonymous email would probably just be ignored.

Show quote history

It's a difficult choice.

ETA - I was once advised, for a letter I was sending, that I needed to send it to more than one person and to declare all the people it was being sent to in the letter itself. That way, one person can't just bin it and remove all trace of it.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/08/2026 00:04

Isthiscorrect123 · 14/08/2026 23:50

Thanks everyone.

I've drafted an email querying if this is compliant with The Workplace Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations, with links and quotes, and also referred to the GLP Vs EHRC judgement, again with links and quotes.

I'm working tomorrow, so gearing myself up to press send.

That sounds perfect, well done 👏

Original poster
Isthiscorrect123 · 15/08/2026 00:03

CassOle · 14/08/2026 23:57

You can always send it from an anonymous email account if you are worried.

I am thinking about doing that, but I think an anonymous email would probably just be ignored.

OP posts:
CassOle · 14/08/2026 23:57

You can always send it from an anonymous email account if you are worried.

Original poster
Isthiscorrect123 · 14/08/2026 23:50

Thanks everyone.

I've drafted an email querying if this is compliant with The Workplace Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations, with links and quotes, and also referred to the GLP Vs EHRC judgement, again with links and quotes.

I'm working tomorrow, so gearing myself up to press send.

OP posts:
SallyDraperGetInHere · 14/08/2026 23:37

yetanotherusernameAgain · 13/08/2026 15:37

You don't need to go in all guns blazing, just point out what RoyalCorgi said: that although they're not bound by the EHRC Code of Practice, they are bound by the Work Place Regulations 1992. Send them a link to the main document, quote the 2 or 3 relevant sections, and ask if they are going to review their decision about gender identity being the determinant of which toilet etc to use, rather than sex.

I agree. You can say you don’t think the policy they’ve announced is in line with Workplace Regulations, and suggest they rigorously asses their policy and take independent advice to ensure compliance and avoid possible legal challenges.

AimsAndObjectives · 14/08/2026 23:30

lcakethereforeIam · 14/08/2026 23:27

😃 Dim problemio.

I thought you'd been hacked. Sori

lcakethereforeIam · 14/08/2026 23:27

😃 Dim problemio.

AimsAndObjectives · 14/08/2026 23:24

lcakethereforeIam · 14/08/2026 23:21

Just bumping to lay some zombies to rest.

Good luck OP

Oh dear. I reported your account earlier for randomly bumping threads, after our zombie thread visitor😯

lcakethereforeIam · 14/08/2026 23:21

Just bumping to lay some zombies to rest.

Good luck OP

Ereshkigalangcleg · 14/08/2026 14:02

Definitely mention the GLP v EHRC case because it constitutes specific case law on this issue.

Original poster
Isthiscorrect123 · 14/08/2026 13:46

Thanks for all your advice and comments.

I think I'm going to go down the "worried the company could get into trouble for breaking the law" route.

Just thinking of the best way to word it.

OP posts:
BCBird · 14/08/2026 08:13

Have u got a union?

Fafafabienne · 14/08/2026 08:00

I think the problem is that health and safety teams who do know the laws have been placed at lower importance than DEI ones especially where they may have consulted stonewall law. And senior managers have not listened.

Health and safety people have also been made to feel they cannot speak up. Just like any other company function employees. It’s harder I would say for health and safety professionals as they know the 1992 regs and you can only grit your teeth as we all know what can happen otherwise. Still.

And the health and safety executive isn’t leading vocally - where are they on this? Where have they been?

Hence we have ordinary companies with self ID policies and saying they are waiting for “the guidance” and employees frustrated as the least we can expect is for employment and other laws to be applied correctly.

hahabahbag · 13/08/2026 22:49

Toilets and other facilities should be either single sex or fully self contained (basin in with the toilet and full length door) in smaller workplaces fully self contained is the norm

theilltemperedmonster · 13/08/2026 22:42

Report them to HSE. They can get fined £40k+.

akkakk · 13/08/2026 20:31

MoistVonL · 13/08/2026 16:27

I think one of the most concerning aspects of this entire shit show is how many HR and legal departments seem to regard both Employment law and H&S law as a pick and mix

I think it goes beyond just pick and mix... it seems that people feel that they can invent the law and there is no accountability / no comeback...

I think that is why we see Stonewall and Mermaids and others inventing law - they know full well what the real law is - it is easy enough to read for even non-lawyers - but they believe that they can get away with inventing their law and if they circulate it / shout about it enough it will become defacto behaviour (even if never actually law) - and we have seen a great deal of success over the years which is only now being dismantled

Sinceyouasked · 13/08/2026 20:02

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, Postcode]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]
[Date]
[Employer’s Name / HR Manager’s Name]
[Company Name]
[Company Address]
Dear [Employer’s Name / HR Manager],
Re: Provision of single-sex workplace toilets
I am writing to raise a formal concern regarding the current arrangements for toilet facilities at [workplace / site name] and to request that these be provided strictly on a single-sex basis in accordance with the Equality Act 2010.
Following the Supreme Court judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] (confirming that “sex” in the Equality Act means biological sex) and the subsequent High Court decision in R (Good Law Project & Ors) v Equality and Human Rights Commission (judgment handed down 13 February 2026), the legal position is clear. Single-sex facilities, including workplace toilets and changing rooms, may lawfully be restricted to people of the same biological sex. The High Court dismissed the challenge to the EHRC’s interim guidance and confirmed that sex-based provision of such facilities is lawful.
In practical terms this means:

  • Women’s toilets should be for biological females only.
  • Men’s toilets should be for biological males only.
  • Where single-sex facilities are provided, allowing access on the basis of self-identified gender (rather than biological sex) is inconsistent with the statutory scheme and risks unlawful discrimination against service users and employees of the opposite sex (particularly women seeking privacy, dignity and safety).
Employers remain under a duty not to leave any employee without suitable facilities. Where necessary, this can be met by providing additional gender-neutral or single-occupancy options alongside properly single-sex provision. However, converting or operating the existing single-sex toilets as mixed-sex or “inclusive” facilities is not required by law and may itself give rise to discrimination claims. I therefore request that the company:
  1. Reviews its current toilet policy and signage.
  2. Ensures that designated single-sex toilets are reserved for use by people of the relevant biological sex.
  3. Confirms in writing the steps that will be taken and the expected timescale.
I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter constructively. Please treat this letter as formal notification of my concerns under the company’s grievance or dignity-at-work procedures if that is the appropriate route. Yours sincerely, [Your Name] [Job Title / Department]
Sinceyouasked · 13/08/2026 20:00

Isthiscorrect123 · 13/08/2026 16:17

That's what confused me.

I thought it couldn't possibly be right that that supposedly SSSs could be used by the opposite sex in the workplace, but it's a huge company with a legal team so I thought the decision to allow people to choose based on gender identity must have been checked by lawyers before it was announced.

Maybe not, though. Or could there be a legal loophole somewhere that makes it okay?

Show quote history

I’m a lawyer no loophole

Sinceyouasked · 13/08/2026 19:59

RoyalCorgi · 13/08/2026 14:31

They are right to say the Code of Practice for single sex spaces applies to public facilities only. However, they are bound by the Workplace Regulations 1992, which do mandate single-sex toilets and changing rooms.

Yes this - see GLP v EHRC case decided earlier this year.

Has to be single sex or they are discriminating against you.

Datun · 13/08/2026 19:31

Well done for querying it, OP. And I'm sure I (and everyone else) totally understands why you don't necessarily want to raise your head above the parapet.

So absolutely send an anonymous letter quoting the health and safety regulations and mentioning a breach could likely be criminal.

And then just sit back and watch what happens.

FrippEnos · 13/08/2026 16:43

Seainasive · 13/08/2026 16:24

Makes you wonder what other parts of H&S legislations they are are going to ignore…

If schools are anything to go by.
As much as they can get away with before something goes wrong (or they get caught).

FrippEnos · 13/08/2026 16:42

MoistVonL · 13/08/2026 16:27

I think one of the most concerning aspects of this entire shit show is how many HR and legal departments seem to regard both Employment law and H&S law as a pick and mix

Its because many of the departments get their information form stonewall, mermaids and allosrts.
Who also have no idea about the law.

FrippEnos · 13/08/2026 16:36

As people have said, bring it up as a query and base it around not wanting the company to get into trouble.

You could put something about outside visitors may complain about.

But the truth is that many HR departments are very much bought and also linked to DEI, and many do not understand the law around what they are doing.

Swipe left for the next trending thread