Toilets on trains: Luxury or Necessity?

[colchesterken]

I think the rule should be a toilet at every station or on the train, as an older person using a local service you have to plan going to the toilet for your journey, most local councils have closed public toilets so there is unlikely to be one outside the station
They have the portaloos at car boot sales why not at the stations ( firmly fixed down or they would be on the line Sat nights )

 

[ys123]

Who even uses toilets on trains these days? Most of them are dirty, manky cesspits anyway.

If it's dirty then at least one person must've used it

 

[satisnek]

I think that there's another issue here which was alluded to in an earlier thread. In the old days of 'dump' toilets (not nice for those who work on the track, I know) the facility was always available. Even if it was blocked/out of water/totally rank you could still use it if you really had to. Nowadays toilet compartments, loaded with all the latest gizmology, will lock themselves out of use if any problem is detected. As I'm sure I've said before, since the introduction of the 172s on my local line toilets are optional.

 

[Kneedown]

There seems to be a fair bit of discussion as to the length of journey being a factor in whether or not toilets are provided on board. The fact is though, that even the shortest of train journeys has the potential to become a long one. Train failure, infrastructure problems or other incident can easily turn a 20 minute journey into a 2+ hour one.
Mention has also been made of the various conditions which can cause an urgent need for the toilet. Crohns, Ulcerative Colitis and IBS to name but a few. How does the lack of facilities on some services fit in with forthcoming DDA compliance?

 

[boyaloud]

Manchester Victoria to Leeds (Calder Valley line) Approx 1hr 25mins

Manchester Victoria to Blackburn 1hr 15mins (although I believe the train originated from kirkby 2hrs 27mins)

Some people won't use the loos at Leeds or Manchester Victoria to save 30p and rely on getting a working loo on the train.

Free toilets in McDonald's above the station concourse at Arena entrance level.

 

[AlterEgo]

There seems to be a fair bit of discussion as to the length of journey being a factor in whether or not toilets are provided on board. The fact is though, that even the shortest of train journeys has the potential to become a long one. Train failure, infrastructure problems or other incident can easily turn a 20 minute journey into a 2+ hour one.
Mention has also been made of the various conditions which can cause an urgent need for the toilet. Crohns, Ulcerative Colitis and IBS to name but a few. How does the lack of facilities on some services fit in with forthcoming DDA compliance?

The DDA was superseded by the Equality Act 2010. It's unclear whether the lack of toilets is a breach of the legislation, but the new Merseyrail stock on order *I don't think* has toilets.

Certainly, recently built Tube stock and prospective designs don't include toilets either.

Where do you draw the line?

 

[sarahj]

When the 313's were placed on our routes, there was a discussion about the lack of toilets and it seemed the only rules on toilets was if there was catering on board, then they must be supplied.

It can get difficult, and recent changes in diagrams have placed a 313 on the last train that runs from Portsmouth to Brighton, which has made things interesting. When you have 4 folks peeing in a car park during the Littlehampton reverse, you know things ain't gonna be good.

As staff we have just been given a diagram for the new year which involves working a 313 for about 5 1/2 hours with no time to go to the toilet. It has been rejected by the union, but the way things are at the mo.....

BTW, over in the Netherlands. A few years ago some new train were delivered without toilets. There was such an outcry that the gov rules that all trains must have them, and big program was set up to retrofit them into units without.

 

[HowardGWR]

The DDA was superseded by the Equality Act 2010. It's unclear whether the lack of toilets is a breach of the legislation, but the new Merseyrail stock on order *I don't think* has toilets.

Certainly, recently built Tube stock and prospective designs don't include toilets either.

Where do you draw the line?

Length of journey between stops, equipped with facilities. 30 mins max? One could then always get off and use them and then rejoin on next train.

 

[HowardGWR]

When the 313's were placed on our routes, there was a discussion about the lack of toilets and it seemed the only rules on toilets was if there was catering on board, then they must be supplied.

It can get difficult, and recent changes in diagrams have placed a 313 on the last train that runs from Portsmouth to Brighton, which has made things interesting. When you have 4 folks peeing in a car park during the Littlehampton reverse, you know things ain't gonna be good.

As staff we have just been given a diagram for the new year which involves working a 313 for about 5 1/2 hours with no time to go to the toilet. It has been rejected by the union, but the way things are at the mo.....

BTW, over in the Netherlands. A few years ago some new train were delivered without toilets. There was such an outcry that the gov rules that all trains must have them, and big program was set up to retrofit them into units without.

Sarah, great posting and informative as well as amusing, as always.

 

[northwichcat]

I think that there's another issue here which was alluded to in an earlier thread. In the old days of 'dump' toilets (not nice for those who work on the track, I know) the facility was always available. Even if it was blocked/out of water/totally rank you could still use it if you really had to. Nowadays toilet compartments, loaded with all the latest gizmology, will lock themselves out of use if any problem is detected. As I'm sure I've said before, since the introduction of the 172s on my local line toilets are optional.

The majority of Northern trains still have toilets that dump on to the tracks. However, that doesn't mean they are always usable as even on Pacers which have old fashioned toilet doors the lock can be broken or even the door no longer properly shuts. Another problem specifically with Pacer toilets is they were designed for local low usage routes but they are used regularly on longer services and routes with high loadings so they can run out of water much earlier in the day than would be expected.

 

[northwichcat]

When the 313's were placed on our routes, there was a discussion about the lack of toilets and it seemed the only rules on toilets was if there was catering on board, then they must be supplied.

With supermarkets it seems if they sell drinks to be consumed on site then toilets have to be provided. With 'Northern Connect' the intention is going to be to sell refreshments at stations where Northern Connect services stop instead of providing a service on board. Does that mean as the intention is for drinks to be consumed on board that toilets must be provided on board?

However, as I mentioned Northern have a franchise requirement to provide toilets on trains regardless. Other franchises have similar requirements e.g. Scotrail has one but it doesn't extend to Glasgow commuter services.

 

[backontrack]

What if you have Crohn's disease?

 

[AlterEgo]

Northern's franchise agreement states all multiple units must have at least one toilet per set. Therefore, there is a legally binding agreement for Northern to provide toilets for passengers and from 1st Jan 2020 that extends to cover wheelchair accessible toilets on all services.

I can't see where it says that:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa.../file/537465/northern-franchise-agreement.pdf

Have I missed something?

I note that by 1 Jan 2020 all toilets that do exist have to be converted to Controlled Emission Toilets, and that any new EMUs or DMUs must have these also, but I don't see anywhere that states that all Northern units must have "a toilet".

 

[northwichcat]

I can't see where it says that:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa.../file/537465/northern-franchise-agreement.pdf

Have I missed something?

I note that by 1 Jan 2020 all toilets that do exist have to be converted to Controlled Emission Toilets, and that any new EMUs or DMUs must have these also, but I don't see anywhere that states that all Northern units must have "a toilet".

Which Northern trains didn't have a toilet at the start of the franchise? None.

What trains will join the Northern fleet which don't have toilets? None.

What provision is there for removing toilets? The 24 x 150s which will be reformed in to 16 x 3 car 150s and where there are two toilets on the same unit e.g. the 158s and 319s (under condition 36.1.)

Therefore, there isn't any provision for running toilet-less trains.

"By no later than 31 July 2016 the Franchisee shall carry out a clean of all vehicles within the Train Fleet on the Start Date compliant with the Deep Clean Specification. As part of such works all toilets shall have 'toilet wrapping' vinyl material of an appropriate quality applied to their walls and ceilings.

All toilets should have included the Pacer toilets.

Toilet Operation & fit for use is included in the SQS Train Benchmarks and has a weighting of 33% under ambience (the same weighting as lighting) so a working toilet is obviously seen as important as working internal lights.

 

[AlterEgo]

Which Northern trains didn't have a toilet at the start of the franchise? None.

What trains will join the Northern fleet which don't have toilets? None.

What provision is there for removing toilets? The 24 x 150s which will be reformed in to 16 x 3 car 150s and where there are two toilets on the same unit e.g. the 158s and 319s (under condition 36.1.)

Therefore, there isn't any provision for running toilet-less trains.

All toilets should have included the Pacer toilets.

Toilet Operation & fit for use is included in the SQS Train Benchmarks and has a weighting of 33% under ambience (the same weighting as lighting) so a working toilet is obviously seen as important as working internal lights.

Ah, I see. So a train may run without a toilet, if there is a mechanical issue, but Northern may face some sanction if it does so (too often?).

 

[najaB]

Ah, I see. So a train may run without a toilet, if there is a mechanical issue, but Northern may face some sanction if it does so (too often?).

Yes. Unfortunately, rather than explaining that they reduced it to "a luxury rather than necessity".

 

[Bevan Price]

I admit I wouldn't dare use the bogs on the Pacer units especially on jointed track!

I have had to use Pacer loos on occasion, but it can be hard to avoid wetting your shoes (or the floor.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Either that "deep clean" wasn't carried out or its spec was seriously deficient in my book...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[185]

Still giggling from seeing this thread earlier today.

Luxury:

 

[Starmill]

Fundamentally you can't stop people's bodily functions. Eventually, everyone is going to need to go and they are probably going to put wetting themselves last on their list of solutions to that. If there is an oppourtunity for people to get off the train to make use of facilities at stations (or in dire need places where at least the waste is not left on the train...) toilets could be done without. There are cases of this, but it is pretty rare, and therefore they are generally a necessity. Breaking these rules is what leads to such unpleasant jobs for the cleaners.

 

[Howardh]

Perhaps TOC's should distribute empty Oasis plastic bottles....:-x

 

[trainophile]

Perhaps TOC's should distribute empty Oasis plastic bottles....:-x

And for the ladies...?

 

[najaB]

And for the ladies...?

An empty Oasis plastic bottle and a SheWee™?

 

[trainophile]

An empty Oasis plastic bottle and a SheWee™?

That should keep the other passengers entertained .

 

[Starmill]

It almost would not be unprecedented!

Dutch trains to get 'bag toilets'


Dutch National Railways is introducing emergency plastic bags for passengers to urinate in as part of its first-aid provision on some commuter trains.
Spokesman Jeroen von Geusau told the BBC "wee bags" would be installed on commuter trains without toilets.
He said the bags were for use in emergencies such as power failures.
"When you have to wait three or four hours on a train, then it is quite logical you have some people aboard who need to go to a restroom," he said.
"It is like when a plane is circling above London for two hours."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15220297

 

[PHILIPE]

Yes. Unfortunately, rather than explaining that they reduced it to "a luxury rather than necessity".

To many people it can be a necessity. There have become less toilets at stations over the years in so much as they are only open at times when the station is staffed

 

[paulfoel]

well as someone who suffers from colitis a toilet on a train is a must i will not us any transport with out a toilet except a short bus ride

For this reason alone it should be illegal to run a train service without toilet facilities....

Imagine running trains saying sorry no wheelchairs or disabled people allowed on board?

 

[northwichcat]

For this reason alone it should be illegal to run a train service without toilet facilities....

Imagine running trains saying sorry no wheelchairs or disabled people allowed on board?

If you were a wheelchair passenger and had a Birmingham Stations to Ardwick Advance ticket Northern would have to refuse to convey you to Ardwick by train and arrange a complimentary taxi from Piccadilly to Ardwick. However, if you held a Manchester to Cardiff Advance ticket and had a medical condition meaning you had to use the toilet but there was no working toilet on board you would be relying to staff discretion to endorse your ticket to allow you to break your journey.

 

[AlterEgo]

For this reason alone it should be illegal to run a train service without toilet facilities....

Imagine running trains saying sorry no wheelchairs or disabled people allowed on board?

But trains can and do run without accessible facilities. For example, the train is too full and crowded to allow a passenger in a wheelchair on, or the disabled loo breaks, or the carriage with the wheelchair space is locked out of use.

It is only illegal if the company is shown to have not made reasonable (note: "reasonable", not "turning the earth upside down") adjustments. The company does not have an obligation to "convey all disabled people all of the time", because the law recognises that disability is a broad spectrum - clearly, someone in an iron lung cannot be carried by train, but someone with IBS or a walking stick or a wheelchair should reasonably expect to be able to use the train.

Just saying "make it illegal to run the train then" isn't going to solve anything. All you'll get is trains being cancelled instead of running with defective toilets. And then, rather than a few people being inconvenienced, you'll have hundreds.

 

[northwichcat]

Just saying "make it illegal to run the train then" isn't going to solve anything. All you'll get is trains being cancelled instead of running with defective toilets. And then, rather than a few people being inconvenienced, you'll have hundreds.

Plus if the train is cancelled and people are waiting at a remote station without public toilets nearby for an extra hour then it's no better than running a train without a working toilet and people having to wait until their destination. Although, advertising the unavailability of on board toilets might help.