Wagamama and gender neutral toilets

[TulipsTulipsTulips]

40% of wagamama’s toilets will be gender neutral by September. The last thing I want to do when I go out for a meal is share the facilities with men. We are different and deserve privacy! How have women’s interests become such a low priority?

Jolly good but what relevance does all of that have as to whether a single use toilet can be situated on a corridor used by people of the opposite sex?

I suggest you read the Equality Act very carefully ..

Why? We can read it as carefully as you like and it still won't have any bearing on what Wagamama are proposing.

Yeah, no thanks.

JackyHolyoake

And what is the issue anyway? If you are so convinced that these toilets contravene the EA (which they don't) then you have great grounds to challenge them don't you?

Jolly good but what relevance does all of that have as to whether a single use toilet can be situated on a corridor used by people of the opposite sex?

If the "corridor" is an open public space visible to public oversight and if each individual toilet space is self contained with its own wash basin and hand drying facility, there is no issue . However, if that corridor is behind an outer door and is therefore an enclosed corridor there is an issue of a mixed sex space concealed from public oversight. Subsection 6 can then be used.

Subsection 6 can then be used.

But you’d need to show someone could reasonably object to a person of the opposite sex in the corridor. Has it ever been successfully pleaded?

If the "corridor" is an open public space visible to public oversight and if each individual toilet space is self contained with its own wash basin and hand drying facility, there is no issue

Well that is exactly what the toilets at wagamamas are like, as could has been trying to tell you.

If you are so convinced that these toilets contravene the EA (which they don't) then you have great grounds to challenge them don't you?

Indeed I do .. and I also have the choice, along with other women, to boycott Wagamama and impact the profitability of that company for its blatant misogyny.

But you’d need to show someone could reasonably object to a person of the opposite sex in the corridor. Has it ever been successfully pleaded?

I think the preferred method of protest is to boycott such companies and impact their profitability.

However, it is also possible to ask the EHRC to issue guidance to such companies about the application of subsection 6 and that their ignorance of this could leave them open to a discrimination claim.

But you've just said yourself that these toilets aren't contravening the EA. I don't think you know what you are talking about tbh.

But you've just said yourself that these toilets aren't contravening the EA. I don't think you know what you are talking about tbh.

What I have said here is that subsection 6 can be applied where any company providing the public service of toilet facilities ignores the need for single sex provision. This means that any female can object to any male person in their designated private single sex space or service [and vice versa].

My point here is that alongside single sex provision for the female sex and the male sex there should be additional provision for "mixed sex" facilities for those who wish to use such. That is, third and very separate spaces / services.

Where does it say anywhere that businesses have to provide single sex plus a third space?

What you want and what the Equality Act actually requires are totally different things.

Where does it say anywhere that businesses have to provide single sex plus a third space?

One might also ask: where does it say in any law that there should be any mixed sex provision where issues of personal safety, privacy and dignity are concerned?

There are no such instances ... the Equality Act specifically refers to sex as a protected characteristic.

In UK law sex is defined as "a congruence of chromosomes, gonads and genitals".

The Equality Act 2010 defines the sexes thus:

man = a male of any age
woman = a female of any age.

What you want and what the Equality Act actually requires are totally different things.

I strongly recommend that you read the entirety of sections 26, 27 and 28 of Schedule 3. This is nothing to do with what I want, it is about the Exceptions provided by the Equality Act 2010.

Further, read Schedule 9 and Schedule 23.

Yes you keep telling us to read the Equality Act when a) I already have and b) it simply doesn't say what you claim it does, however carefully you read it.

Why don't you have a go at reading it again?

So, explain to me exactly where I am "misreading" the Equality Act please.

PChole It's been almost 30 minutes since my question above:

So, explain to me exactly where I am "misreading" the Equality Act please.

Goodness, I do apologise for not being on Mumsnet at your convenience.

You are misreading s.27(6) of Schedule 3, section 27. The section permits the provision of single sex spaces such as toilets and changing rooms. The section does not, as you claim, prohibit the provision of unisex sole occupancy toilets or somehow transform public spaces such as corridors, hallways or any room into which a toilet opens, into an area it is reasonable to expect to be single sex.

You are also misreading whichever section of the EA you think requires separate male and female loos. The EA permits this but it doesn't require it. There is separate legislation requiring the provision of male and female loos applicable in some circumstances eg. the Workplace Regs 1992.

JackyHolyoake

You are misinterpreting the EA or you are misunderstanding what these toilets are.

PChole It's been almost 30 minutes since my question above

😂

The section does not, as you claim, prohibit the provision of unisex sole occupancy toilets or somehow transform public spaces such as corridors, hallways or any room into which a toilet opens, into an area it is reasonable to expect to be single sex.

Except, that I did not make the claim you describe above. What I said was that subsection 6 provides provision for females to object to males in their single sex spaces / service [and vice versa[. This means that a female has a legal right to refer to management of such single sex spaces and require that male to be removed. If all spaces are "mixed sex" there is an opportunity to make a claim of sex discrimination by either males or females by way of subsection 6, since "mixed sex" has no basis in any current UK law in circumstances where safety, privacy and dignity are concerned.

But these aren't single sex spaces, so how is any of that relevant?