Opposite sex cleaners and violations of privacy

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.

You have loos that get cleaned?! Seriously though, I am afraid it is an issue and one that needs addressing with a simple policy, males clean male toilets and likewise females for the ladies, that way no-one gets embarrassed and no-one rsks being accused of inappropriate behaviour. Simples!

Jodie
Since when have men had periods, been pregnant or gone through menopause? We all (or most of us) make love, does that mean we should do it in public? If you happen to work for a large organisation, eg a hospital-you will regularly see the cleaners! How comfortable is it to have someone of the opposite sex who knows your personal body functions, (or whether or not you've been circumsized, if male) from meeting you in the toilet at work? Its fine if you know the cleaner is in there and have a choice (though not much of a choice if you happen to be on diuretics or have a menstrual accident), but if you are already in the toilet or changing room and the cleaner enters it is offensive/intimidating and undignified for many people who would (and should) be able to choose not to put themselves in this situation. Using a cubicle is not an option for many people who are put off using the facility full stop if same sex privacy cannot be guaranteed.

Jane
Why would you be worried about your daughter but not your son? This is exactly the type of stereotyping they are trying to eradicate? Women have proved to be abusers too!

I guess saying this is a non-issue is quite blunt, but I have to agree. I can understand that men can feel exposed needing to use a urinal with a female cleaner being in the facilities and from a Faciltiies Management perspective that's just bad practice.

It is not realistic to expect a company to recruit cleaners by gender and therefore it is not possible to guarantee same sex cleaners, especially taking in mind holiday/sickness cover.

In public places it is not as easy to make your concerns heard, so I can only recommend if you find yourself in an uncomfortable situation, use a cubicle. Someone of the opposite sex may be able to hear you, but is that really such an issue? We all have the same bodily functions and let's face it, will you ever see them again?

From a personal point of view I have walked into the toilet many times when a male cleaner was present and it has never bothered me. So I also think that side of the argument is a non-issue.

If we are talking about children there are two scenarios: If I had a small son who went to the toilet and there was a female cleaner in there, that would not bother me, it may do in reverse if I had a yound daughter.

Simple solution: if they are young they go with me and if they are older I tell them to walk out and wait until the cleaner has finished!

Totally agree. This IS a Non - Issue.

Mark
Whilst this is a non issue for you, you do not seem to appreciate that many of us would not be happy in a cubicle which is situated in a singlle sex designated area where same sex privacy is reasonable. Cubicles have gaps top and bottom and often elsewhere, broken locks and do not give auditory privacy, even if partial visual privacy! As with Bayry's wife, it is not pleasant to exit a cubicle in the ladies and find a man standing there privvy to your personal body functions and what if you need to wash afterwards in the sink area? Many women would feel threatened and demeaned by this and spare a thought for the elderly and people with medical conditions-cancers, irritable bowel, bladder, prostate problems, paruresis etc. Diabetics may need to administer their insulin injections which involves body exposure and there is not enough room to set things out cleanly and safely in most cubicles! This is a difficult subject to complain about and I am sure if an anonymous survey was carried out asking specific questions about this you would find most people are not happy and would prefer same sex toilets and changing rooms. The only way forward is conversion to direct access, unisex, fully enclosed single cubicles opening out to a public area where nobody has to be in a enclosed area with anyone else. Given that many men and women have been sexually abused and the devastating effects this causes, choice about who sees and touches and has access to ones body is the only way to avoid the potential to trigger re enactment of these feelings. Developing children may not have the capacity to cope emotionally with cross sex exposure and 'sexualised' attention which may adversely affect their future health and relationships-this is abusive to many and subtle child abuse and should be stopped!

Martin,

I think that you have hit the nail on the head there. This is obviously a subject that a very small number feel strongly about, but as for most of us ...........................it’s a non – issue.

As you say, a female would always be inside a cubicle in a public toilet, where they can not be seen or interfered with. Likewise with a male – on the very rare occasion that a cleaner (of any sex) may be in the toilet, they too can use a cubicle.

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.

No offence taken but the fact it is as you say "public" doesn't mean that we are all fair game to be looked at whilst we pee. The cleaner I mentioned was looking in the mirror as she cleaned the wash basins. That to me is unnacceptable behaviour but if I complained how could I prove it?

It isn't easy to go elsewhere if you're on a motorway & I certainly wouldn't pee outside. I always use cubicles anyway but on the occasion described I couldn't do that with a woman in the gents despite the fact that I was hidden from her view, I knew she was there.

On another occasion in the railway station uin Birmingham, the cubicles in the gents are on the ground floor & you have to go up a few steps to reach the urinals. Two female cleaners were standing at the bottom of ther stairs chatting whilst men had to go past & up the stairs where the woman were loking. If men did this in the ladies then we would be called perverts!

Does the lack of involvement in this thread indicate that your opinions are not generally shared? Only three of you discussing this particular thread since December?
Don't get it. If a cleaner is in there when you are there could you not ask them to leave until you are finished? If they will not, go elsewhere? If they enter the area when you are in a cubicle, they cannot see anything anyway.
If you are in a public toilet, that gives it away - public. Therefore potentially less privacy. Entering a public area will not provide the sort of privacy you will expect in a non public area.
Just my opinion. No offence meant etc.

I am not at all comfortable with male cleaners in ladies toilets & female cleaners in men's toilets.

I walked into one at a motorway service station on the M1 a few weeks ago & there was a female cleaner washing hand basins & looking in the mirro where she could see many men urinating at the urinals. She could quite easily see more than the men would have liked. I walked out. I have great difficulty keeping my mouth shut when I see a male cleaner following my wife into the toilet.

I believe it should be eitgher stopped & have same sex cleaners or that the toilets should be closed until the cleaner is finished.

Hi Rachel
Sorry to take so long to reply but have had flul! I am not sure about how the law relates to the provision of public toilets by Locaal Authorities. I think MP's have been lobbying for more provision of public toilets-might be worth contacting yours! I am referring more to the difficulties with balancing the rights of the worker to do a job (Gender Equality Duty) with the needs to protect the privacy and dignity of the users of toilet and washing facilities (SDA). According to the Health and Safety Executive, each employer has a legal and moral duty to ensure that employees and visitors to a place of work are not harmed by the activities taking place. Furthermore, the risk of ill health, including mental illness, as a result of stress should be part of this process. I think it is very stressful to have to worry about whether or not there will be an opposite sex worker in there when you are desperate, or having your privacy violated by an opposite sex worker suddenly entering facilities while you are already using them!
Equality law seems to be misused as an excuse to get a way with providing only one cleaner and this means that privacy and dignity and choice is being eroded. There appears to be a conflict of interest between promoting equality for the worker without compromising the rights of the service users. I cannot imagine how any cleaner would feel deprived by not having to clean the loos of the opposite sex! I do not think privacy & decency should be compromised for the service users or the cleaners-they are about the lowest paid workers and obviously both male and female are required to keep the loos clean without causing severe embarassment and distress to many (including the cleaners). There is no point in providing clean loos if people are not comfortable to use them! I guess its immaterial if there are no facilities at all!
Denise

Hi again Denise - it looks like you and I are the only ones chatting on this subject!

I gather there is no legal requirement for local authority provision of public toilets. In the case of commercial / private property, my understanding is that premises have only to provide EMPLOYEE facilities (including separate sex facilities wherever possible and / or an accessible facility for disabled persons - I assume this is the 'equality law' you refer to).
(See http://www.workplacelaw.net/forums/listComments/thread_id/1824).

Hence Sunderland train station is undergoing a £7m refurb programme (paid for by transport company Nexus) - but there will be no 'public' toilets.

No public toilet requirement presumably means no facilities management regulations apply (unless I've missed something) - and therein lies the problem. I have myself been in a private health club where two plumbers were attending to the ladies' toilets; the changing room they were in was still open, albeit with a large warning sign on the door. Needless to say, no one was getting changed on site that day!

Hi Rachel
I have not come accross shared facilities other than single access cubicles, but I think equality law is quite explicit about provision of single sex facilities in a public place such as a pub if there is more than one cubicle with the facilities. If it is like a toilet in a private house then this can be shared and obviously the cleaner, can not enter when the facility is in use, nor can anyone else! I have noticed that there are increasing attacks by men on women in nightclubs-perhaps this reflects shared facilities?
I agree with you that CRB checks are not a guarantee of safety and should not be relied upon, but it does seem mad that parents cannot enter a school playground with their child unless they have been CRB checked yet those same children may find themselves alone in a toilet provided for women (or men) with an opposite sex cleaner/worker and no one seems to be concerned about this!
Some one who is determined to commit a criminal act will not be deterred no matter what however they are likely to look for the areas of weakness or easier point of access i.e. a burglar intent to break in somewhere is more likely to enter a house through an open window rather than break one, or will enter the completely empty house rather than the one with a large noisy German shepherd in it barking its head off. The current laxed situation with regard to cleaning toilet/washing facilities is however just making it easier for them! A 9 year old girl was assaulted in an Asda loo by a man who pretended to be an electrician who set up a mirror to spy on her from the next cubicle. This would not have happened if he had been chaperoned by a female woker and the loo had been closed down -which would have been the normal procedure.
Regards
Denise

Hi Denise,

I do see your point - but it would take more than legislation to stop a man / woman with criminal intent entering an opposite sex rest room. One should also remember a CRB check only shows whether or not the person in question has actually been caught acting unlawfully. It's not a guarantee of safety.

How would new rules accommodate the shared facilities of some pubs / clubs / motorway services?

Conflicts of interest in Equality Law, Health & Safety regulations and the Sex Discrimination Act exception relating to privacy & dignity (section 7 2 bii) have resulted in gross offences to decency in public toilet and washing/changing facilities where cleaners of either sex are expected to check the toilets of either sex and perform visual inspections regularly throughout the day (e.g.every 30 mins in Asda, hourly in M & S).
In the absence of strict codes of access men are having female cleaners walking in while they are using urinals (sometimes troughs and without privacy guards ie legalised indecent exposure) and women and young girls may find themselves alone with a male cleaner in the ladies toilet enclosure when they exit a cubicle. Cleaners are not required to be CRB checked and there is no other situation where this would be permitted e.g doctors/nurses have strict chaperoning policies and codes of practice in situations involving cross sex observation. This raises child protection/safety concerns for the public and the cleaners in times of paedophilia and sex related crimes. Complaints go unheard yet while we all want clean toilets most of us are uncomfortable to varying degrees with members of the opposite sex in close visual and auditory proximity when performing excretory functions outside of family and intimate relationships.
EHRC advise that best practice in this situation is that management are advised to put up signs saying that male cleaners are cleaning the toilets (or vice versa) giving times but this is not happening in practice. Having had the experience of suddenly finding myself alone in what I thought was a female toilet enclosure with a man coming in unexpectedly I know how distressing, demeaning and frightening this can be and feel strongly that enforcement of the Law/codes of practice which prevent opposite sex cleaners entering when people are using facilities need to be implemented urgently before someone collapses in shock or is assaulted by a pervert posing as a cleaner. What do other people think?