Cafe wouldn’t let pregnant woman use toilet

[searchingforlight]

I’ve just ordered some breakfast for collection from a local cafe round the corner and had a quick flick through the reviews first. The most recent review is:

‘As a heavily pregnant lady went in desperate for the bathroom and they refused to let me use their toilet despite me being in tears and not close to anywhere else open. In a packed shop full of customers, they said no with no heart, no remorse, no feeling. Have never been more horrified, myself and my husband will never be using this place again’

I feel like it’s a bit harsh and the bit about there being nowhere to go close by is very untrue. There’s a Morrison’s maximum 5 minutes walk away with toilets. As a (second time) pregnant woman myself I wouldn’t get annoyed if an establishment didn't let me use staff toilets, I’d just find somewhere with public ones. The cafe gave a long response as to why they couldn’t let her use the bathroom. Mainly because their insurance didn’t cover customers in the staff area of the cafe and there were lots of boxes etc. laid about. If the pregnant woman had hurt herself then it probably wouldn’t have been good for them. They also said they managed to get the keys for the toilet in the opposite pub so it’s not like the reviewer didn’t get to use one. I think it was quite kind of them to go to the effort of making sure she used a bathroom.

Do you think she’s being reasonable or not? I think she’s being a bit U due to there being a Morrison’s so close by! (I’m not the cafe owner just interested in people’s views). My DM thinks they should have let her use it no questions asked purely because she was pregnant, I’m a little unsure

I notice that the posters who say that people should be able to use staff toilets regardless of risk haven’t returned to answer the questions about how to allow it without leaving paying customers, etc?

The practicalities aren’t as simple once you put some thought into it, are they?

I'm with the reviewer here. The insurance risk is complete rubbish imo - risk of injury must be low (as it's an area accessible to staff so should be safe to be in!!), risk of injury + the woman making a claim even lower,
risk of the woman actually succeeding in any claim - practically zero if the cafe explained that the area wasn't meant for customers and she'd be entering at her own risk.

I'm with the reviewer here. The insurance risk is complete rubbish imo - risk of injury must be low (as it's an area accessible to staff so should be safe to be in!!), risk of injury + the woman making a claim even lower,

Would you let her use the staff toilet if it put your job on the line?

It'd have to be a pretty toxic workplace if your boss would fire you (almost certainly illegally) for letting someone in dire need use the staff toilet. If the staff were genuinely in fear for their jobs, then I'd place the blame higher up but I still don't think the cafe itself is covered in glory.

I haven't read the whole thread, but my solution to the perennial problem of lack of public loos is that all pubs should have it as a condition of their licence that they must allow anyone to use their toilets. This would really be a very minor extra expense for pubs, and could easily be justified as payback for the fact that occasionally their customers cause a (usually minor) public nuisance for being drunk.

This instantly would create a network of public toilets across the country!

The practicalities aren’t as simple once you put some thought into it, are they?

Yeah but is easy to bluster on about how you are the saintly protector of all/would barge past and find the loo anyway/let strangers into your own home when you are armchair warrioring in MN.

As someone who has worked in a shop, we cannot let members of the public use staff toilets. Full stop. You cannot expect a minimum wage barista to risk getting fired for breaking boss's rules, or sued by the woman if she claims she fell over/ something happened, simply because you need to wee.

These rules are in place for a reason. Being pregnant does not make needing to pee a medical emergency.

It's these types of people that would drive me up the wall when I worked in customer service, your personal problems are not staff's responsibility.

I don't want to sound mean but not letting people use the staff toilet is a standard rule that is in place for very adequate health and safety reasons.

I haven't read the whole thread, but my solution to the perennial problem of lack of public loos is that all pubs should have it as a condition of their licence that they must allow anyone to use their toilets. This would really be a very minor extra expense for pubs, and could easily be justified as payback for the fact that occasionally their customers cause a (usually minor) public nuisance for being drunk.

That's no solution and will never pass, thankfully, because pubs are private business, not a public fucking bog. Cleaning up a public toilet is a HUGE expense, puts off recruiting employees (in addition to getting heat from the customers, your job includes allowing all and sundry to use the loo and you get to police it if they use it to shoot drugs, rent themselves out oh, and and clean it when they wreck it!), plenty of people use pubs to eat and don't drink alcohol , many pubs are going under as it is. That's the dumbest 'solution' I've ever heard. Glad it isn't so and won't be. I wouldn't want to patronise a pub that were also public toilets.

FWIW there was a national campaign going a while back o try to address the issue around the closure of public loos.

The proposal was that any shop , pub or cafe ( pubs and cafes mainly) could join the scheme and put a sign in their windows saying they allowed people to use the loos.

I don't know what happened to this- maybe it's up and running- and there is also a national website where anyone can list the public loos in their town, so visitors can get to them quickly. It's called 'Find a toilet' or something like that :)

I think you know that offering access to a private, domestic, loo is very different to having a loo in a public cafe

I think a lot of people are going on the assumption that providing toilets and paper/soap/water and paying somebody to clean them doesn't cost anything. It's a business overhead like anything else, which has to be paid for from the profits the business makes from actual customers.

The same as when some small businesses have a few parking spaces for customers, but naturally aren't at all happy if non-customers park there and then go off to do their errands in other local shops that haven't borne the expense of paying for larger premises (and extra business rates) in order to offer parking.

I don't think it warranted that review, I would never have asked to use staff toilets anywhere when pregnant, although I did ask in Halfords if they had customer toilets when I was pregnant (They didn't) but a lovely gent insisted on taking me to the staff toilets to use them

The proposal was that any shop , pub or cafe ( pubs and cafes mainly) could join the scheme and put a sign in their windows saying they allowed people to use the loos.

I could imagine this being ripe for exploitation, though. In theory, it's good PR and will make non-customers keen to return as customers another time, but in practice, most people would just act entitled and treat it like any other public utility with no thought to the kindness of the provider.

In fact, I could well imagine a lot of the entitled sort (with no intention of buying anything) complaining and leaving negative reviews based solely on the toilets if the influx of people before them have used all the paper and soap and/or left it a stinking filthy mess.

Why would you want to risk people harming your business by leaving you negative online reviews, when they only actually cost you money and weren't actual customers - as a direct result of your altruistic kindness being abused (whether by them or by previous freeloaders)?

I think a lot of people are going on the assumption that providing toilets and paper/soap/water and paying somebody to clean them doesn't cost anything. It's a business overhead like anything else, which has to be paid for from the profits the business makes from actual customers.

Mumsnetters are generous as hell with other people's time and resources.

KittenLedWeaning, no i wouldn't let a stranger in to use my loo. But this is a ridiculous comparison. I would be putting myself in physical danger. A cafe that is open to the public with toilets for their customers to use is in no way similar to me and my home.

PersephoneOP the alternative might be cleaning up someone's pee or vomit from the cafe floor. I know what I think would be more pleasant.

no i wouldn't let a stranger in to use my loo. But this is a ridiculous comparison. I would be putting myself in physical danger. A cafe that is open to the public with toilets for their customers to use is in no way similar to me and my home.

Plenty of staff working in public-facing businesses/roles are attacked and abused on a regular basis.

What if some likely-looking people came in to use your toilet and you had cause to suspect (or they might be locally well-known for it) that they were after a place to inject drugs or engage in sexual practices? Chances are that, if they knew they'd have to take the time and spend the money to buy a drink before they could use the toilets, they would move on and find somebody else's facilities to abuse instead. What's the alternative? Let everybody in to use them but also somehow police them to make sure they only use it for its intended purpose and then leave it clean and safe?

It's not even just about that, though - it's the extra cost if plenty of people, all with their own reasons for needing it, cost your business money without contributing to its profits.

How would you feel if the cafe owner had to go and clean someones body fluids from the toilet (with or without a brush) and then came out to serve your food.

the alternative might be cleaning up someone's pee or vomit from the cafe floor. I know what I think would be more pleasant.

Why should it be an either/or, though? If they have no intention of using the business, they have no reason or moral right to enter the premises in the first place. You might as well say let everybody in and invite them to help themselves to £100 worth of goods as the alternative might be them brandishing a weapon and endangering the safety of your employees.

@GoodGriefSunshine as I said earlier some delightful person, (not a customer) decided to light a fire in our toilets yesterday evening. It caused damage, a fire brigadecall out and the evacuation of a very large suermarket, plus police and management time going through the cctv to get an idea of who the offender might have been. This may have been avoided if we could have just customer only toilets sadly thats not possible.

Mumsnetters are generous as hell with other people's time and resources

As I said, if you run a cafe yourself, consider how you would want to be treated if someone (not a customer) asked if they could use your loo because they were desperate (for any reason, disability, pregnancy, small child, elderly person, heavy period, anything). Once you've decided that, then introduce that as a policy for your own cafe.

I think when you think about how you would like to be treated in a similar situation, rather than being all precious about a bit of loo roll and soap, your view on things changes.

Anyway, it's a vote for chains, as you can just pop in and use their loos (Starbucks, Costa etc - as well as chain stores like M&S and Debenhams).

as I said earlier some delightful person, (not a customer) decided to light a fire in our toilets yesterday evening. It caused damage, a fire brigadecall out and the evacuation of a very large suermarket, plus police and management time going through the cctv to get an idea of who the offender might have been. This may have been avoided if we could have just customer only toilets sadly thats not possible

So you know that all your customers are mentally stable and not arsonists? I don't really get the customer/non-customer distinction in terms of damage to the loo/making a mess, though I do get it from a financial perspective.

The world has gone absolutely bat shit if people/businesses are using reasons like insurance and H&S as reasons to not allow someone in desperate need to use the loo.

If they escort someone to the toilet and make sure they can't do anything they shouldn't be, what's the problem? I'm not saying let everyone traipse in and out but a heavily pregnant woman, a child, an OAP, show some kindness!

Our town centre has absolutely no public toilets. There are a couple of pubs, a supermarket, and a few cafes. They all have different rules about toilet use which vary between only for customers, none customers must pay 50p. The supermarket just lets anybody stroll in as it's huge but is quite a distance from that actual centre where the other shops are.

Many people I know now refuse to buy from the places that make it difficult for you to access a toilet or caught short.

One of the cafes managers stood and watched while a 5 year old girl with a water infection cried and wet herself in the doorway while her mother was pleading with them to let her take her to the toilet. She would happily have paid or purchased something after going but they just said no.

The gift shop next door has no obligation to provide customer toilets as they don't serve food. A member of staff saw what had happened and allowed the mother to take her upset child upstairs into the staff area to clean her up and change her clothes.

The cafe loses out here because they now have a reputation for being hard faced and very unkind.

On the other hand we all use that gift shop when we need something from there because we all remember their kindness when they really didn't have to do anything to help.

If they escort someone to the toilet and make sure they can't do anything they shouldn't be, what's the problem?

So who serves the customers and watches the till etc when they're taking someone to the loo? Remember this was a very small cafe/shop so not an army of staff. Perhaps the staff should have forced everyone out, locked the doors, so that they could safely escort the woman to the loo??

Many people I know now refuse to buy from the places that make it difficult for you to access a toilet or caught short.

If so, that is clearly a business decision made by the owners. They'll no doubt compare the costs of providing a customer toilet against the loss of a few customers. When the costs could easily be thousands, it's probably an easy choice to make.

Mumsnetters are generous as hell with other people's time and resources.

Yep! Hence comments about being 'precious' about 'a bit of loo roll and soap'. Don't get how it's a 'vote for chains' if all you're doing is using them as a public toilet anyhow.