Rank: Forum user 
|
I work in a small primary school and we have 3 of the above on our site.We are looking to convert one into an office leaving 2[1 in our main building and 1 in a detached building].Both are accessible one however is the far end of our main building with travel distance a little longer than we would like.
Would we be in breach of the Equality Act by doing this?Any advice appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Why not use one of the other toilets instead??? for the new office. The school was built with 3 accessible toilets so why should you now be looking to reduce the availability further just for administrative ease? Perhaps reduce the size of the heads study!!!!
Sorry to be so strident but I meet this attitude time and again. Strictly if these are unisex accessible toilets for the disabled then they should be used by the disabled only and for no other purpose. Look at the BR document on accessiblity, whiich includes toilets.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
boblewis wrote:unisex accessible toilets for the disabled then they should be used by the disabled only and for no other purpose. Bob, I'm interested in why this should be the case. If an able bodied person needs to use the loo and an accessible one is available are you saying that they should be barred? If you are saying that the accessible one should not be used as a cleaners cupboard/stockroom then I fully agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Provision of facilities for disabled is a Pro active duty and should be done before you even know a disabled person will be attending the location.
What if you reduce the number of facilities then suddenly have an influx of disabled persons, (pupils, visitors and staff)?????
Use of disabled toilet by able person is OK if no other toilet is available at the time but for an able person to choose to use a disabled facility and take the chance of denying the disabled the opportunity to use that facility is a no no .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
David
This is the general recommendation of the Building Regulations and was put in place to stop the double counting of disabled and other toilets and also to prevent the use as a general baby changing facility - often done in many places. Far too often have I waited outside an accessible toilet for 15 min only to find a family of four active people come out. Why use disabled when there should be adequate non disabled facilities in any case for all persons in the building and visitors
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I was on my scooter today, in a large supermarket, and went to the toilet, when I got there the disable toilet was occupied by an able female who had been directed there by the cleaner who was cleaning the ladies loo.
I had to wait as the scooter could not get around the tight bends into the Gents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I have to add that, this doesn't apply to me, but there are disabled people out there who just cannot hold on, when they need to go they NEED TO GO!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.