WASHROOM HYGIENE
In many small businesses it is
expected that there is
only ever a single shared facility, but for larger
organisations, the provision of washroom facilities is a more significant management issue.
Mixed Reactions
The motivations for those who support the development of unisex washrooms that are accessible to both men and women are as diverse as those who condemn the concept.
In those schools where gender neutral washrooms have been introduced as part of an anti-bullying strategy, the claim is that the presence of both sexes reduces the opportunity for bullies (of either sex presumably) to fl ourish. However, opponents speak of the need for privacy for young people and expressed alarm at the possible consequences of all those raging adolescent hormones in close proximity to one another.
For adults in workplaces there are different concerns. In many small businesses it is expected that there is only ever a single shared facility, but for larger organisations with greater staff numbers, the provision of washroom facilities is a more signifi cant management issue. As new offi ce blocks are developed in expensive inner city locations, there is a clear fi nancial benefi t in devoting less space to what could be regarded as unproductive areas. If not necessarily halving the washroom
twitter.com/TomoCleaning
space requirement, mixed gender washrooms need not take up as many square metres as two single gender facilities, so a real fi nancial saving is possible. Those in favour speak of less queuing and tidier environments, whilst those opposed to the idea again speak of loss of privacy and hygiene issues, particularly relating to men using the same cubicles and the age old seat up/seat down debates.
Whatever views are taken, there are two things that must surely be true. Firstly, a single gender washroom should not be designed as merely the amalgamation of a men’s washroom and a women’s washroom. It will surely incorporate those features that address some of the more obvious shortcomings, the likes of full length doors, effective ventilation and screened areas, for example. Secondly, to succeed it must adopt the best practices from the more typical segregated washrooms, it must be clean, tidy, and easy to maintain and deliver the appropriate levels of hygiene.
The Leonardo range of hand towel dispensers are as well established as they are well-regarded because
71
The idea of having mixed gender washroom facilities has sparked plenty of debate in the industry, with some believing that an integrated washroom will reduce maintenance costs and encourage cleanliness, whilst others debate the loss of privacy and the classic complaint of leaving the seat up. Here, Jonathan Hooper, Marketing Manager at Northwood Hygiene Products weighs up the pros and cons of a mixed gender washroom.
they do provide just that opportunity to meet those differing needs and priorities. From the Compact and Classic ranges through to the newly introduced Premium range of dispensers, Leonardo delivers the professionalism and fl exibility that is fundamental to any successful washroom provision. Single sheet presentation reduces waste, larger capacity means less monitoring is needed and the dispensers are designed to be easy to clean and maintain, again reducing costly maintenance operator time. What’s more, there is real evidence to suggest that washrooms equipped with Leonardo dispensing systems are left tidier by users than was previously the case.
Whatever the decision as to the style of away from home washroom provision that best meets the location’s particular needs, partnering with Leonardo will undoubtedly help make it a great success.
www.northwood.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94