Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Toilet Etiquette
37 Answers
this week a letter was sent to all staff at my company concerning the toilets; the site administrator had to virtually seek legal advice before sending it. it concerns what has been delicately phrased as "inappropriate use", leading to cleaning and damage issues.
in simple terms, this is a case of 1960s style facilities meeting certain etiquettes, and the two being incompatible.
i'm no employment law expert so i ask:- is the company correct in expecting all employees to use the facilities as they currently exist and putting same in writing, or would the correct legal response be to provide multicultural facilities?
in simple terms, this is a case of 1960s style facilities meeting certain etiquettes, and the two being incompatible.
i'm no employment law expert so i ask:- is the company correct in expecting all employees to use the facilities as they currently exist and putting same in writing, or would the correct legal response be to provide multicultural facilities?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mushroom25. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Make of this what you will.....
https:/ /islamq a.info/ en/6980 8
From what I can see, if you are building 'new' it is better to observe the 'east/west' conundrum......if existing, let it be.
https:/
From what I can see, if you are building 'new' it is better to observe the 'east/west' conundrum......if existing, let it be.
If there is *no* hard and fast rule, in Islam, about the observance of the 'east/west' WC issue, I imagine it would be difficult to make any provision for it in Employment Law.
Therefore, an employer could say..... (a) get on with our facilities as they are and leave them in good order, and/or (b) we are under no obligation to provide you with facilities as you are asking.
Therefore, an employer could say..... (a) get on with our facilities as they are and leave them in good order, and/or (b) we are under no obligation to provide you with facilities as you are asking.
> Delicately phrased.
LOL. Reminds me of the BlackAdder scene:
Mrs. Pants: But what about the privies?
Blackadder: Um, well, what we are talking about in privy terms is the latest in front wall fresh air orifices combined with a wide capacity gutter installation below.
Mrs. Pants: You mean you crap out the window?
Blackadder: Yes.
Mrs. Pants: Well in that case we'll definitely take it. I can't stand those dirty indoor things.
LOL. Reminds me of the BlackAdder scene:
Mrs. Pants: But what about the privies?
Blackadder: Um, well, what we are talking about in privy terms is the latest in front wall fresh air orifices combined with a wide capacity gutter installation below.
Mrs. Pants: You mean you crap out the window?
Blackadder: Yes.
Mrs. Pants: Well in that case we'll definitely take it. I can't stand those dirty indoor things.
More seriously ...
> i'm no employment law expert so i ask:- is the company correct in expecting all employees to use the facilities as they currently exist and putting same in writing
I would imagine so. Toilets are a health and safety issue and that trumps most things. As Tambo says, the contract was accepted by the employee and I don't see that a standard toilet could be seen as "discriminatory". Many offices don't even have disabled toilets!
A trickier issue might be if the toilets were already "suitable" but the company wanted to refurb them, or move offices, to something that wasn't. Even then, I think it would be OK.
> i'm no employment law expert so i ask:- is the company correct in expecting all employees to use the facilities as they currently exist and putting same in writing
I would imagine so. Toilets are a health and safety issue and that trumps most things. As Tambo says, the contract was accepted by the employee and I don't see that a standard toilet could be seen as "discriminatory". Many offices don't even have disabled toilets!
A trickier issue might be if the toilets were already "suitable" but the company wanted to refurb them, or move offices, to something that wasn't. Even then, I think it would be OK.
I'm still in the dark about what you really mean. ''inappropriate use'' to me means people blocking the toilets with paper towels or worse. I used to be a cleaner for our local community center and you would not believe the mess I used to find in the toilets, with the 'Ladies' always being far worse than the 'Gents'. Then we go off on a tangent about 'squat pans' and facing in the wrong direction.
Until just now I did not know there was a rule about a Loo not facing Mecca if it is intended for Muslims. I worked for 3 years in Saudi Arabia where I was one of a small group of 'Westerners' in a facility with 140 Muslims both male and female. Nothing was ever mentioned about it there.
Until just now I did not know there was a rule about a Loo not facing Mecca if it is intended for Muslims. I worked for 3 years in Saudi Arabia where I was one of a small group of 'Westerners' in a facility with 140 Muslims both male and female. Nothing was ever mentioned about it there.