It costs money to deal with sanitary products bins so I can see an incentive to go along with there are not needed and put onus on women to deal with. Historically I believe employers argued it would cost to much to provide separate female toilets
Which leaves a new fig leaf for women. We won't use your stupid unisex loos if we can't have the dignity and privacy to dispose of sanitary products properly.
Money does motivate.
Loos constantly being bunged up with flushed unflushables is expensive. We don't have to wait until a plumber is needed. We just need to make sure they know the relentless nature of some unintended consequences caused by any hand wafting away of female priorities.
They can be given an endless stream of reasons to start to view this as a really expensive bit of virtue signalling, whose costs can only spiral one way. Just to get to the momentus day where they have the most expensive bogs in the world, but productivity is dropping cos a large chunk of the staff are still sloping off to pee somewhere else instead.
The enemy's biggest strength is on display when people feel they can't say what is really bothering them. It is also the other side's biggest weakness. Because it means them having to deal with raking up a constant flow of fig leaves, which is outrageously expensive in the context of constantly tweaking and refitting facilities. So they need to get sent the message loud and clear.
Autumn Is Coming
.... for the benefit of the managers, and their growing heap of invoices.