New Trans toilet policy

[Thecomedyclub]

Hi all, I’m a very long time lurker but name changed for this (awful that I feel that’s necessary but this is today’s climate).

Essentially, our NHS trust are updating policies as I imagine most are and I have seen a draft.
It’s very long, and there’s nothing unreasonable for the first forty pages or so (!) but buried deep at the end is a very small paragraph referencing toilets.

Without wanting to write it verbatim, the essence is that no one should stop an individual using the toilet of their choice. Goes on to say that a female facility (whether self contained cubicles or not) can be used by anyone identifying as female. And for fairness, it explicitly says a male facility can be used by a male identifier.

My view is that if a self contained cubicle or room (including basin and floor to ceiling walls) is labelled Female (or Male) then just change the label to Unisex.

But that’s not what they are saying and I don’t want to share with a man. For what it’s worth, my Muslim colleagues don’t either and feel unable to comment because they feel marginalised enough as it is.

I don’t think the Darlington ruling is clear enough for me to quote back to them so wondered if anyone can point me in the direction of some substantial evidence perhaps of another Trust or Public Authority who has got the wording nailed?
Thanks in advance.

Am about to run out the door, so am bumping this for other eyes, but also: have you been in touch with SEEN in Health? This is right up their street. They will definitely be able to advise.

This should be useful OP
Template email to raise concerns about workplace toilets - Sex Matters
and there's a range of info about toilet policies available at
For organisations and employees - Sex Matters

I think the recommendation in these cases is to phrase your comments [if you decide to raise the matter, which is up to you &your job situation] as 'concern' about the legality of their approach, when it has been made clear that single sex facilities are segregated by biological sex, not by acquired or identified gender.

'with the intention of seeking clarity and ensuring our compliance with legal obligations' as the Sex Matters template puts it.
[note 'our' compliance - nice touch!]

So you keep it factual and objective, about 'us' potentially getting into trouble for not applying the law correctly, rather than getting into what you personally think about it all.

I hope that helps. Good luck!

Do the men's loos have urinals? If so I think that is highly irregular to say anybody can use them if they wish to. At least the women have cubickes/privacy.

There is someone who posts here, I think keeptoiletssinglesex who knows all the regulations in detail.

It’s @Keeptoiletssafe - and yes, she is a veritable fount of toilet information!

Hello

Also on the move today so sorry if my response is sporadic. Sex Matters have got a good shout out above. Are you in England?

It's worth noting that there are specific work place H&S regs on the difference between single sex and unisex facilities

Any part of the trust policy that relates to staff must comply with the 1992 H&S regs.

The Darlington judgement did make this clear, and although the Fife judgement seemed to think the H&S regs could be ignored for the purposes of the tribunal, it would be 'brave' for any employer to assume that they could therefore ignore the H&S regs.

And there she is, within a couple of posts of being summoned mentioned😁
You really are such a star, Keeptoiletssafe, your knowledge and your willingness to share it is very valuable and very much appreciated!

Darlington judgment
Judgment
Some useful paras

363. We were however satisfied that despite the admirable purpose of seeking to include transpeople in the workplace and make them feel included, the implementation of the part of the TIW policy that effectively required the Claimants to share with Rose had the effect of violating the dignity of the Claimants and of creating for them a hostile, humiliating and degrading environment.

Workplace regulations
373
we conclude that from the moment it permitted Rose to use the female changing room, the Trust was in breach of the 1992 Regulations.

Indirect discrimination
417. We agree with Mr Fetto’s submission that the single-sex changing facility was a private and intimate space, in which women undressed to their underwear and that the actual or potential presence of a biological male in that context particularly adversely impacts women by causing them fear, distress and/or humiliation because they are statistically more likely than men to have experienced sex-based harassment and/or violence and because women are generally more sensitive than men to being required or expected to undress in the presence of a person of the opposite biological sex. We agree that the likelihood that more women than men will suffer fear, distress and/or humiliation in these circumstances, to a large extent follows from the Respondent’s admission regards sex-based harassment, but that it is also heavily supported by sociological observation and research, as described by Prof Phoenix in her report.

Thank you all for your help! Yes, in England. I have everything I need from you lovely lot but I really wish I didn’t have to tell them…. Oh that we had an EDI department

Write it here verbatim and we can write you a very clear objection letter that directly leans on the equality act and Darlington case.

OP as you are in England you have even more ammunition because it is clear, as you and others have said, it is the design that is different. From what you are saying, single sex designs (toilet in a cubicle then a shared sink?) are being used for both sexes. I am not clear what the current provision set-up is but here’s a few bits you may find useful:

HSE (regarding Document T) that says only toilets in a single sex environment can have door gaps. Therefore if the toilets have door gaps they have to be in a single sex environment before the cubicle doors. I had this clarified in an email.

Document T only is for refurbs and toilets from 2024, but it would be a ‘brave’ venue to argue with HSE that single sex designs were suitable for mixed sex. As far as I am aware, no mixed sex provision has ever allowed door gaps. I would suggest that the Sexual Offences Act would need to be revisited if so.

There is also Document M which is for accessibility: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66f6c5eec71e42688b65ee11/ADM__V2_with_2024_amendments.pdf which states that to satisfy Part M1 and M3 at least one WC cubicle is provided in separate-sex toilet accommodation for use by ambulant disabled people.

There are so many reasons unisex toilets are less safe and healthy, particularly in a hospital. There’s 4 health and safety reasons why single sex toilets have door gaps: ventilation, cleaning, supervision (in case of medical emergencies), and prevention of misuse (including preventing sex and drugs).

As hospitals and care settings will have more ill people, and people when they feel really ill may rush to the nearest toilet, it is not surprising a lot of people collapse in hospital toilets. We need them to be as safe as possible. For example up to 11% of cardiac arrests happen on the toilet. It’s upsetting that people can be left for days in private designs of toilets in a setting best placed to help them. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3590314/

The pathogen plume that covers the immediate area everytime someone flushes, will cover the sink and dryer in a unisex toilet. If the sink is in the room outside the toilet cubicle, it will have less particles from the previous occupants flushes, so you will be washing your hands in clear surroundings.

Here’s some recent scientific research on how unisex toilet designs are the best for high pathogen numbers:
https://salus.global/article-show/pathogen-findings-raise-concerns-about-move-to-unisex-hospital-facilities

Here’s the WRN report on sexual assaults and rapes in hospitals:
https://www.womensrights.network/hospital-report

and here’s the WRN pictures to show what problems occur when you try and use a single sex design for both sexes:
https://www.womensrights.network/school-toilets

It’s obvious why toilets in a mixed sex environment should have complete privacy. Voyeurism is so common in toilets you should be able to find a local case if you google. However be careful how you do this. Do not put ‘voyeur’ first because you’ll get lots of results on websites with pages of footage from toilets. Obviously setting up a hidden camera helps if you have legitimate access, it’s completely private and there’s lots of places to hide it. Ironically unisex toilets provide the best opportunities for men to do this.

So many examples in hospitals include
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/health/man-arrested-after-recording-device-allegedly-found-in-belfast-hospital-toilet/a1600040325.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-30196241.amp

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/airbnb-hidden-cameras-doctor-jail-voyeurism-b2747307.html

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n944

It’s a worldwide problem. This one shows the potential problems for a hospital in Australia as the nurses want to sue:
https://www.carbonelawyers.com.au/case-files/nurses-doctors-could-receive-big-payouts-from-melbourne-hospitals-after-they-were-allegedly-filmed-in-toilets/

Now I'm having visions of wandering into some dodgily designed toilets and saying @Keeptoiletssafe3 times into the mirror and then "poof" just like Candyman she appears but gives a devastating safety and legality critique instead of unleashing violence

Can I have a cape and a toilet brush wand?! 😂.

I got excited about a really good vent I saw on a train toilet door the other day. I asked the guard if I could take a picture and I realised I have reached peak toilet-design nerd status.

I'm not suggesting you say this in a letter OP, but

"a female facility (whether self contained cubicles or not) can be used by anyone identifying as female."

makes no sense at all. They might as well say we have toilets for bleeps and bloops, but we have no way of knowing whether somebody is a bleep or a bloop and we can't explain why they need different toilets.

They must have some inkling of the reasons for single sex toilets, otherwise, why bother? If you ignore all those reasons, its much cheaper and more space efficient if everyone shares.

I thought of you when I went to DD's(all girl) school the other day when I noted the floor and ceiling gaps in the toilets and the locks that can be opened from outside the cubicle 😁 - and for educating us x

I’ve kept it redacted and deliberately vague as I know what repercussions look like. But thanks for all the info and advice. I will keep marching on!

These accounts are pretty anonymous but you do what you need to do :)

@Keeptoiletssafe I am so grateful to you for taking the time to share all this detail - the HSE angle is perfect too.

@SingleSexSpacesInSchools I don’t want to give too much away but I am already pretty gobby (and senior) so it would be a dead giveaway. I don’t mind submitting my response once it’s been thought through but I’m not sure they would see this MN post as anything other than washing their filthy linen in public. But I do appreciate everyone’s contributions.

The regs
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/3004/schedule/1

And as noted above a urinal is recognised as a male only provision or a "suitable water closet"

I’m a dab hand at the public washing

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5461521-single-sex-changing-spaces-in-a-brighton-secondary-school-part-2-the-one-with-the-solicitors-and-the-vexatious-parent?page=1

PM me if you want I’m sure I can help write the letter

@Thecomedyclub, have DMed you.

Be careful what you wish for! Remember that it is really important that they all have their chromosomes properly checked, because it leads to all sorts of confusion if they aren’t sure of their own sex.

She's flush with knowledge (sorry, KTS).

Basically, you're amazing.