8

Let's say for some reason a business owner decided to make all their restrooms unisex. These are not single-person rooms, but larger restrooms with numerous toilets (and possible urinals).

Is there any reason this would not be allowed legally? I know there are requirements for restrooms, but I'm not aware of any requirement that explicitly states there must be separate accommodations for separate sexes. Can an owner provide only unisex multi-person restroom if they so chose?

Let's use my home state of Maryland where state law is relevant.

feetwet
  • 22,409
  • 13
  • 92
  • 189
dsollen
  • 10,179
  • 7
  • 59
  • 116

4 Answers4

14

No.

U.S. Federal Regulations

An employer having only unisex, multi-person restrooms is a violation of OSHA regulations. Sex-specific restrooms are required, at least for the employees, unless the restrooms are only single-occupancy.

While, as another answer mentions, California has a law authorizing cities in California to require restrooms to be gender-neutral, such laws would be unenforceable as preempted by federal law unless/until the OSHA regulation is changed.

(For those not familiar with U.S. regulations, OSHA is the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which regulates workplace safety. Its regulations apply to the entire United States.)

29 CFR 1910.141(c)(1)(i) is the relevant regulation here (emphasis mine):

Except as otherwise indicated in this paragraph (c)(1)(i), toilet facilities, in toilet rooms separate for each sex, shall be provided in all places of employment in accordance with table J-1 of this section. The number of facilities to be provided for each sex shall be based on the number of employees of that sex for whom the facilities are furnished. Where toilet rooms will be occupied by no more than one person at a time, can be locked from the inside, and contain at least one water closet, separate toilet rooms for each sex need not be provided. Where such single-occupancy rooms have more than one toilet facility, only one such facility in each toilet room shall be counted for the purpose of table J-1.

There is an explicit exception to the requirement for the restrooms to be sex-specific for single-occupancy restrooms, but there is no exception for restrooms designed to be occupied by multiple people as you've described.

This particular regulation applies only to restrooms that are available to employees (as opposed to those exclusively for use of patrons.) Requirements for those exclusively for use of patrons are set by state-level plumbing codes.

Maryland Plumbing Codes

While the OSHA regulation above does not apply to restrooms for use only by patrons, Maryland's plumbing codes require separate facilities for each sex for those, too, with a few exceptions.

Section 403.2 of Maryland's plumbing code (emphasis mine):

403.2 Separate Facilities

Where plumbing fixtures are required, separate facilities shall be provided for each sex.

Exceptions:

  1. Separate facilities shall not be required for dwelling units and sleeping units.
  2. Separate facilities shall not be required in structures or tenant spaces with a total occupant load, including both employees and customers, of 15 or fewer.
  3. Separate facilities shall not be required in mercantile occupancies in which the maximum occupant load is 100 or fewer.
  4. Separate facilities shall not be required in business occupancies in which the maximum occupant load is 25 or fewer.

403.2.1 Family or Assisted-Use Toilet Facilities Serving as Separate Facilities

Where a building or tenant space requires a separate toilet facility for each sex and each toilet facility is required to have only one water closet, two family or assisted-use toilet facilities shall be permitted to serve as the required separate facilities. Family or assisted-use toilet facilities shall not be required to be identified for exclusive use by either sex as required by Section 403.4.

Canadian Luke
  • 107
  • 6
reirab
  • 3,487
  • 17
  • 29
12

Gender-inclusive multi-person restroom facilities are allowed universally in Canada. I cannot prove a negative (i.e. demonstrating that there does not exist any prohibition on this kind of facility), but I can point to examples that have faced no legal challenges.1 See for example, and another.

Most existing designs use stalls with closing doors, along with shared space for hand washing, etc. But some provide urinals. For example, the Canadian Human Rights Museum simply notes on signage what amenities are present in each restroom facility and then people choose which room to use regardless of gender:

By the end of this week, all washrooms signage will be changed to include the specific amenities available in each space, including icons for toilets, urinals and adult or child change tables.

1. This of course leaves open the possibility that there exists a prohibition but that it not been used by anyone to challenge such restroom designs, for a variety of reasons: acceptability of the practice, lack of resources, etc.

Jen
  • 87,647
  • 5
  • 181
  • 381
9

California passed a relevant law, SB 1194

Notwithstanding Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 401.0) of the California Plumbing Code (Part 5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), a city, county, or city and county may require new or renovated public toilet facilities within its jurisdiction to be designed, constructed, and identified for use by all genders instead of the design standards for separate facilities for men and women found in the applicable provisions in Chapter 4 of the California Plumbing Code

This permits but does not require lower levels of government in the state to mandate "only unisex" bathrooms, when such bathrooms are newly constructed or renovated. So it is not just legal in California, it is required.

user6726
  • 217,973
  • 11
  • 354
  • 589
1

In the workplace, the law allows a shared space for washing hands, but the toilets themselves must be in a room with a locking door (and separate handwashing facilities) if the adjoining space is shared.

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992

Sanitary conveniences
20.—(1) Suitable and sufficient sanitary conveniences shall be provided at readily accessible places.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), sanitary conveniences shall not be suitable unless—

(a) the rooms containing them are adequately ventilated and lit;
(b) they and the rooms containing them are kept in a clean and orderly condition; and
(c) separate rooms containing conveniences are provided for men and women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside.

and

Separate [Washing] facilities are provided for men and women, except where and so far as they are provided in a room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside and the facilities in each such room are intended to be used by only one person at a time.

The government is intending to raise legislation to make unisex toilets cubicles illegal in all public buildings. This will include the public-facing parts of schools and hospitals.

All new public buildings should have separate male and female toilets, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has announced today (4 July 2022).

The approach will mean women, who may need to use facilities more often for example because of pregnancy and sanitary needs, have appropriate facilities.

Press release: All public buildings to have separate male and female toilets

Richard
  • 4,342
  • 13
  • 36