There have always been issues with corporate loo management. One is that the subject arouses a certain snigger-factor in managers and employees. Possibly as a result, the subject is often not taken seriously by facilities managers in terms of specification and provision.
From a design point of view, many would agree that the washroom has always been left to the apprentice draughtsman because partners in design consultancies believe that ‘toilets don’t win awards.’
And yet, some businesses do see the value of the washroom. Major retailers and pubs had their profit margins in mind when they began to open up their loos to the walk-in public, since they knew that getting people through the door was the first step in making a sale. It is no surprise that the JD Wetherspoon pub chain, which has a policy of keeping people on its premises for as long as possible, is the Loo of the Year champion, and over a hundred of its pubs won certificates in the 2010 awards. Similarly, McDonald’s maintains that the investment of a small fortune in entry fees is worth it to be able to display winning certificates in so many sites.
Raising the standard of away-from-home washrooms
The Loo of the Year awards were formed in 1987 to put a spotlight on away-from-home toilets throughout the UK. The awards are run by the British Toilet Association, which has produced an ‘away from home toilet charter’, which is now used as a benchmark by some cleaning contractors in their tendering. Nominations are already open for the 2011 awards, for which judging will take place between April and September. The judging is supposed to be anonymous, and carried out by mystery-shopper visitors who are all former senior executives from the sanitary industries. However, tightened security arrangements at many corporate buildings now make unannounced judging extremely awkward. One corporate winner is reported to have only realised they were being judged when their security team saw a man holding a clipboard coming out of the ladies’ loo. Fortunately, the company won a high award.
The same principle applies to the corporate office, where the washroom acts as a reputation-builder. In a pub, many customers walk into the loo before ordering food and if they are dissatisfied with the state of cleanliness of the washroom, they won’t eat there. If the loo in a corporate building is below expectations, a potential customer may decide not to do business there, and a good potential employee may walk away.
A touch of class
However, for those who really want to make a corporate impact, the loo now offers the next big thing in image; touch-less technology exists which has paved the way for a washroom requiring little or no hand contact with the facilities.
In a corporate office, the loo is a big factor in ‘making a company statement’, confirms Mike Bone, managing director at the Loo of the Year awards. “The two big image-makers in the corporate office are the canteen and the toilets. If a customer is on your premises and discovers grotty toilets, what does it say? It suggests that your general company management isn’t very reliable.”
Bone believes that entering the awards is a sign that mangers are taking the subject seriously. “We know that FMs who enter our awards are aware of this,” he says. “It’s the ones who don’t enter that we worry about, because it is very true that many workplace toilets really should be demolished.”
Trends from 2010
For building managers, the Loo of the Year awards provide clues to best-practice and coming technology. The judges of the 2010 awards reported an increase in eco-technologies such as sensor taps, which help overcome the problem of passing bacteria via touch, and reduce water usage. They also saw more washrooms featuring solar panels for water heating, and ‘sun pipes’ or ‘suncatchers’, which typically sit in ceilings and roofs, and enhance natural light, while often also act as ventilators.
One major technology which the judges saw in some entries is still virtually unknown in the general corporate world is the ‘low-water’ or ‘waterless’ toilet. “Water-flushing systems in urinals are usually operated by timing devices,” explains Mike Bone. “In a low-water flush, the urine passes through a device which fixes into the outlet and stops odours coming back. The big advantage is reduced water consumption, which in large corporate buildings, factories, or airports, is a major cost.
“We may have several hundred clients using them in Canary Wharf, but many corporate managers still seem unaware of the system,” confirms David White, technical and operations manager of Gentworks, a pioneer in the sector.
“One advantage is that taking away the water element of the flush actually does prevent some blockages from salts and minerals which usually occur further down the pipes. The most obvious advantage of a low-water system is that on a urinal that flushes three or four times an hour, you could achieve a saving of £50-60 per urinal per year. On a waterless system, you could save maybe £120 per urinal, per year.”
The movement towards the greener washroom is increasing, says Paul Mather of PVM. He argues that corporate buyers who are enthusiastic about many other sustainable projects can still miss the opportunities in the washroom.
Typically, a big employer can easily use 5,000 loo rolls a year (not least because Britons use more toilet paper than any other country, although nobody knows why). Since Paul Mather began promoting loo paper made entirely from recycled sources, his sales to business clients have gone up fifty per cent in six months.
“Our strategy has been to reduce the quantity of paper used, by a controlled dispensing system, while still making sure the weight and quality is sufficient. Anything that goes down the toilet is a good starting place for a green strategy you can reduce your chemicals used, use greener cleaning cloths, and generally think about better cleaning strategies. Often, you can achieve a greener result by making few changes.”
Hand dryer or towel?
Although fundamental problems can mainly be put right by simple cleaning, there are some surprisingly fierce arguments going on over washroom technology, says Andrew Large, chief executive of the Cleaning and Support Services Association.
“There is one ongoing dispute which periodically ‘gets legal’. It is a three-way dispute between towels, ‘normal’ hot-air hand driers, and the forced-air driers such as the Dyson, which do not heat the air but rely upon speed to evaporate moisture.
“The fundamental disagreements are about which is the most environmentally sustainable, and which most prevents transmission of infection each side comes forward with ‘new evidence’ to prove it is the best, and then each starts taking legal advice.
Warfare in the washroom
The Cleaning and Support Services Association has highlighted the problem that corporate specifiers face in finding their way through ‘evidence’ produced to support the various methods of washroom hand-drying. Sellers of the most traditional of all methods, the paper towel, have been particularly active in coming up with findings to support their product. In 2008, one such British study alleged that the familiar warm air dryer increased the number of bacteria on the hands by between 194 per cent and 254 per cent, that a jet air dryer also resulted in an increase of bacteria from 15 per cent to 42 per cent. By contrast, it was claimed that paper towels reduce hand bacteria by up to 77 per cent. Another study in the same year, for a tissue industry event, suggested that 63 per cent of respondents prefer paper towels, as being both faster and more hygienic. An earlier survey by the Mayo Clinic had suggested that all methods are roughly equal in removing bacteria from hands.
“It’s not just between the machinery makers. The hand-towel people are active participants, and they argue that only disposable paper towels will actually remove bacteria. They argue that hot-air driers increase the hand temperature, which helps bacteria breed on damp hands; they argue that the forced-air method blows bacteria further, and creates puddles of cold water with which you then tread bacteria round your building.
“For both the FM and the washroom contractor, this is all a very real challenge. I suspect that with the best will in the world, most FMs hold their hands up and just hope that some supplier can give them a coherent presentation about it.”
Many washroom problems are easily solved with simple products, but there is a big technological advance on the way, says Andrew Large.
“The technology already exists for you to have a washroom which requires no hand-touches at all.
“Everything is done by infra-red sensor, or by timer. There are already bacterial sprays which sit above a door and spray sanitisers on the exit handles every so often, and there are also infra-red sensors which detect exit movement and do the same.
“However, the new thinking is of complete touch-free operation the door opens when you approach, the light comes on when you walk in, the taps switch on and off by sensor, the loos flush in the same way.”
There is already a similar system in place for the staff who do the washroom cleaning, says, TC of Tadworth in Surrey. This industrial contractor, working for the likes of Remploy, has collected ninety four-star and five-star Loo of the Year awards, four national awards, and has qualified for the BTA’s Champions League standard of excellence.
“Our framework for managing washroom facilities is to follow the crucial elements from the British Toilet Association away-from-home charter,” comments sales and marketing director Paul Faulkner. “This includes adequate directions and signage, including how to contact the person responsible, adequate facilities for female users (roughly double the number of male urinals), and an effective cleaning regime and management,
“Maintenance techniques are ever-changing, but one system we prefer to use is the latest technology of FRV (foam, rinse, and vac). This is a unique system using a foam-based chemical which sanitises and degreases all surfaces. The cleaning process comprises three steps foam spraying and chemical action, rinsing and finishing, then vacuuming of the residual liquid.
“Uniquely, it allows no-touch washroom cleaning.”
