Wetherspoons on the SC Ruling

[MyKingdomforaNameChange]

Don't know if this has been posted yet, sorry if it has - but thought it was interesting!

Well done Wetherspoons! Common sense at last! 👏

I think it’s BS personally, and not written by anyone with any particular oversight.

apparently a business’s insurance may be invalid if they don’t comply so I can’t see this happening in the way IW wants.

https://x.com/bencooper/status/1916215281715974650?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA
Ben says:
The way companies and organisations will be forced to comply with the Supreme Court judgement is via their insurers. They have to, by law, have Employers’ Liability Insurance. If they don’t implement the ruling, their insurance company will simply cancel cover.

You can’t get insurance to cover you for breaking the law. Underwriters are usually pretty sharp on that kind of thing, because it opens them up to the risk of expensive lawsuits - and we’ve had several examples recently even before the SC made it explicit.

So it might take a little time to trickle through, but probably not all that long, and hopefully won’t need any more test cases.

(Optimistic prediction I know!)

Corporations are quite Marxist* - they profess to have values, but only to get your money. The only principle is shareholder value.

*Groucho Marx - “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them, I have others.” 😀

Scroll down to Seeing as this is ‘Danielle’ who started the rumour with an undated screenshot, I suspect this is bollocks.

This was posted yesterday on social media by a transwoman I know. I'm pretty sure that it's genuine but of course it wasn't in reply to my own query to Wetherspoons so I can't be 100% sure.

It may have been true, there’s no way they can uphold that promise.

Interview on Peston. He's going to have a word with Keir.

https://x.com/itvpeston/status/1915166520210059282?t=XogtvgrSRVftyq7fiQ3rCg&s=19

‘Danielle’ alleging this is true. If so (and who knows) then the reply was sent before the EHRC statement.

I think this is where we will see whether the declaration can be legally enforced.

There is a legal requirement to provide single sex facilities in schools, in places of employment and in hospitals. As far as ai am aware, there is no current legal requirement for single sex toilets in places frequented by the public but such a law was proposed last year.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-lay-new-law-to-halt-the-march-of-gender-neutral-toilets-in-buildings

Over 80% of respondents were in favour of single sex provision and of universal provision... ie male, female and everyone.

Tim Martin doesn't come out of that interview well. He sounds clueless.

But I did laugh at him complaining about "things being subcontracted to organisations". Does he mean Stonewall?

Does "blue hair" mean an older person?

Exactly - it’s an undated screenshot sent out into the wild!

This is very clear, JulesJules, thank you.

You make the point that 'unisex' loos - I think the term used in building regs is 'universal' - have to have specific features, they are not just a women's or a men's with a different label stuck on the door.

So the mythical 'third spaces' for trans people can't be magicked up by converting an existing single-sex toilets - or worse still, ALL the existing single sex toilets - into 'unisex'.

To that extent, companies like Wetherspoons could [rather vindictively, I think] just say right, all our toilets are unisex, problem solved and TERFs defeated.

But if they leave the 'women' and 'men' signs on the door and not only permit but encourage people to use the wrong one, they are in trouble with the law.

If the newly-rebadged 'unisex' toilets do not meet the requirements of 'universal' toilets, they are in trouble with building regs.

Either way, a not good plan...

And the accessible toilet is for disabled people who actually need it, not for able-bodied people to feel more comfortable in.

@AelitaQueenofMars exactly. It wouldn't suprise me at all if they're circulating made up emails/declarations to convince the public that everyone is on their side. Even the unlikeliest suspects

Who next?

We, the Palestinian Authority stand with our Trans Brothers. Sisters, whatever

It used to about sixty years ago, if you mean “blue rinse” which was the way my mother’s generation brightened up their greying hair. Now times have moved on, which means younger generations have adopted all sorts of shades of unflattering - often blue - hair colour. Those older women who do, generally go with patches of pink and purple, making them look like old fashioned (80s) Christmas decorations made out of crêpe paper.

lmao that’s rich coming from them not tolerating discrimination. Brexit wasn’t that long ago.

Here's the relevant bit of The Building (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2024

T1.—(1) Toilet accommodation in buildings other than dwellings—

(a)must consist of—
(i)reasonable provision for male and female single-sex toilets, or
(ii)where space precludes provision of single-sex toilets, universal toilets, and

(b)may consist of universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets.

“single-sex toilet” means toilet facilities which—
(a)are intended for the exclusive use of persons of the same sex, and
(b)provide washbasins and hand-drying facilities in—
(i)either the toilet room or cubicle, or
(ii)a separate area intended for use only by persons of that sex.

“universal toilet” means toilet facilities which—
(a)are provided in a fully enclosed room which contains a water-closet and washbasin and hand-drying facilities, and
(b)is intended for individual use by persons of either sex.
The Building (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2024

Sorry the formatting isn't great.

I note that it says it refers to Toilet accommodation in buildings other than dwellings - surely that mean pubs etc. are subject to the same regs?

Also that single sex provision is a must, as long as there is enough space, and unisex provision is optional, unless it is the only possibility because of space constraints.
It should not replace single sex toilets as long as there is space for them.

There is no reason to design new buildings which have adequate space for single sex toilets without them, so if there's a trend towards all new building only having unisex toilets, that would appear not to conform to the building regs.

And note that any proposed 'third space unisex toilets' have to be
a fully enclosed room which contains a water-closet and washbasin and hand-drying facilities
so not just any old women's/men's toilet with a fancy new label on the door.

Do all Wetherspoons have toilets that are only used by staff? If the staff use the same bogs as the customers then, regardless of anything else, they'll have to be single sex won't they?

Last week I was in one of those pubs and it was virtually all elderly men. The Men’s toilet was on the ground floor, the Women’s Toilet was up two flights of stairs, along a long corridor and felt very isolated.

They have CCTV in all communal areas of the Toilets 🙄

A surprising number of TRAs have bright blue hair.

Based on the toilet I walked into yesterday in Sainsburys, I'm confident women are capable of pissing and shitting everywhere but the toilet too. The amount of times I've walked into cubicles with bloody tampons discarded on the floor is too many to count as well.

I've been in toilets and restaurants like that. Need a trail of breadcrumbs to find your way back. They are unnerving.

Eta responding to @MyAlternate

Because some women are messy and gross, all women need to let men into their single-sex spaces. Is that the logic here?

If on the very slim chance that Timmy wrote this tweet, perhaps it's because he wants to return to the good old days when women weren't allowed in public houses at all?

Off topic but Jesus Christ, where do you live?! I’ve never encountered this ever and am knocking on a bit and been to some right old ropey joints in my time.

The men's toilets in my local Spoons are utterly gross (according to my DH) and have a line of urinals as you enter. The ladies are fine. I do hope they do not become unisex.
I find it hard to believe that post is genuine. It will be an interesting strategy if TRAs start putting out fake announcements.