UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – UK businesses warn EHRC’s new toilet guidance is “unworkable,” citing high costs, operational challenges, and unclear rules on trans inclusion.
As reported by The Guardian, British firms fear the EHRC’s new guidance on toilets and changing rooms could create “confusion”, prove “unworkable”, and “undermine inclusion”.
What did Stonewall write in its letter to ministers on EHRC rules?
The LGBTQ+ rights group Stonewall has warned business and trade ministers that firms already struggling may face significant costs under the EHRC rules.
The equality charity in the letter to Peter Kyle and Chris Bryant, states,
“The guidance as it stands fails to provide practical examples and clear guidance on how to implement changes necessary to comply with the law.”
According to the letter, the Equality Act 2010 carried an estimated first-year cost of more than £300m, but neither the EHRC nor the government has reviewed the financial impact of the new guidance.
Hundreds of businesses, from major firms like Ben & Jerry’s and Lush to small cafes and beauty studios, wrote to ministers Ms Phillipson and Mr Kyle last week.
What did the new EHRC code mean for businesses and public bodies?
The EHRC has submitted formal guidance to the UK government on how public bodies and businesses should respond to April’s Supreme Court ruling on biological sex. Its chair, Kishwer Falkner, admitted that many organisations would find adapting to the guidance “difficult.”
The updated rules are expected to reflect April’s interim guidance, which effectively restricts transgender people from using facilities that match their lived gender. They also allow organisations to request birth certificates to protect single-sex services.
Service providers, associations, and those delivering public functions await approval of the updated code of practice from Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson. Critics said the six-week consultation was too brief and relied on AI to review more than 50,000 submissions.
Ms Falkner said,
“practical steps according to their own circumstances in their own organisation. Which is why we’ve always emphasised that they should take their own [legal] advice, as well as adhering to our code.”
What did Kate Nicholls say about EHRC guidance clarity?
Kate Nicholls, UKHospitality chair, stressed it is “critical” that the final EHRC guidance is clear and practical for operators.
She said,
“While the EHRC is clear in its intentions, there will be confusion among operators about how this should be applied in hospitality, where venues differ drastically in terms of size, space and age of buildings. For example, requiring multiple toilet facilities in small or listed buildings is often not logistically possible.”
What did the Co-op spokesperson say on safety and fairness under EHRC guidance?
A spokesperson from the Co-op stated,
“We remain deeply concerned about the potential impact of the forthcoming EHRC guidance.”
They added,
“Our priority is to provide safe and welcoming spaces where all colleagues and customers feel a genuine sense of belonging and safety. The interim guidance did not deliver the clarity needed to protect individual rights, and we are concerned it could undermine people’s sense of inclusion and expose them to challenging situations.”
What did Rosalyn Berrisford say about EHRC guidance challenges?
The UK head of Awin, Rosalyn Berrisford, warned that the new EHRC guidance could undermine inclusion and create “significant operational challenges.”
She added,
“At our London office, gender-neutral facilities are limited, and we do not collect data on whether staff or visitors are transgender. Nor do we believe it appropriate to request personal documentation such as birth certificates, as suggested in the EHRC’s guidance. Enforcing access restrictions to basic amenities, or directing trans individuals to separate facilities outside the main office, is neither practical nor aligned with our values.”
What did Alex Whitcroft say about EHRC guidance challenges?
Alex Whitcroft, director of London- and Bristol-based housing developer KIN, said the proposed guidance is “completely unworkable.”
He warned that small businesses and construction sector operations would face significant practical difficulties.
What did the Supreme Court rule about the biological meaning of the Equality Act?
On April 17, the Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling on the definition of sex under the Equality Act.
In an 88-page ruling, Lord Hodge, sitting with Lords Reed and Lloyd-Jones alongside Lady Rose and Simler, the Equality Act’s words for man and woman align with biological characteristics, even though “biological” is not mentioned.
What did Baroness Falkner say Supreme Court ruling and single-sex spaces?
Baroness Kishwer Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, stated,
“We are pleased that this judgment addresses several of the difficulties we highlighted in our submission to the court, including the challenges faced by those seeking to maintain single-sex spaces and the rights of same-sex attracted persons to form associations.”
What did Labour for Trans Rights say about the Supreme Court ruling?
Labour for Trans Rights labelled the Supreme Court’s decision “hugely disappointing”, stating it came as a result of “ceaseless lobbying from a well-funded anti-trans network”.
The group added,
“Labour must not follow the example of Donald Trump, and must instead protect the Equality Act, one of Labour’s proudest pieces of legislation, and its legal protections for trans people. The Labour Party must stand firmly behind the LGBT+ community.”