You again fail to understand how many people use these restrooms every day. They're supply closet-sized because real-estate is prohibitively expensive and were provided solely as an optional amenity. Making them large enough to accommodate the load would make them as large as the establishments within which they reside.
A bouncer is an employee, which costs a lot of money and provides nothing except mitigating the expenses of an entirely optional and unnecessary facility.
A bouncer would still be cheaper than a multi-stall restroom, but here's the issues I see with this.
Starbucks is doing this because 1. Random schmucks come in off the street to use the restroom and nothing else that 2. Creates a line for the restroom which 3. hurts employees who can't pee on their breaks because the line is so long.
Now I'm not too worried about the people who, like you said, just get their drink and leave. Who I am worried about, and who will be most affected, are the malingerers, the people who come for the free wifi and therefore buy their drink and chill out. If they can use the restroom, they will, and maybe buy another drink (gasp! Daddy two-drinks?) By shutting down their restrooms these people aren't going to stay as long, or even at all, because if you're using free wifi you're not gonna be "in and out" as it were. By hurting these people they're hurting their business as they'll go somewhere else.
The other thing they can do (and my friend suggested) is give employees carte-blanche to jump the queue to the bathroom. In conjunction with the bouncer idea, I think it could work.
How about pay $2 for the Starbucks code-swipe app on your smartphone for access to X number of bathroom uses per month?
There's a business model. Public for-pay restrooms. Starbucks probably doesn't want to be in the business, but anyone else is welcome to open some poopers in the City.
I've actually seen this in practice in Paris. While the city does have some publicly owned for-pay restrooms, there are also a few private for-pay restrooms as well. Those private ones were some of the nicest bathrooms I've ever used and even had a "bathroom concierge" of sorts (I'm serious) providing things like hand sanitizer, fancy soaps, and whatnot.
How about pay $2 for the Starbucks code-swipe app on your smartphone for access to X number of bathroom uses per month?
There's a business model. Public for-pay restrooms. Starbucks probably doesn't want to be in the business, but anyone else is welcome to open some poopers in the City.
I've actually seen this in practice in Paris. While the city does have some publicly owned for-pay restrooms, there are also a few private for-pay restrooms as well. Those private ones were some of the nicest bathrooms I've ever used and even had a "bathroom concierge" of sorts (I'm serious) providing things like hand sanitizer, fancy soaps, and whatnot.
Too bad they all closed when I really had to go. I tell you, waiting to use the restroom on the Eiffel Tower is no fucking fun.
Put an electronic lock on the bathroom door. Every purchase in excess of the cost of a small cup of black coffee gets a unique code that expires in 15 minutes printed on the receipt. Feed the receipt into a scanner on the lock, the door unlocks, boom. No bouncers required, no more revolting bathrooms.
Schnipper's does exactly this. I was about to use the bathroom there, realized that I had to go back to my table and get my receipt so I could wait in line, and gave up. I ended up peeing at Grand Central's bathroom instead. Mission accomplished?
... the people who come for the free wifi and therefore buy their drink and chill out. If they can use the restroom, they will, and maybe buy another drink (gasp! Daddy two-drinks?) By shutting down their restrooms these people aren't going to stay as long, or even at all, because if you're using free wifi you're not gonna be "in and out" as it were. By hurting these people they're hurting their business as they'll go somewhere else.
Clearly not offering them bathrooms will not hurt business, or Starbucks wouldn't have done it. If anything, these people COST Starbucks business if they camp all day in their stores using the WiFi and bathroom while buying an extra drink or two. Starbucks decided that extra drink's revenues aren't worth the expense of catering to them.
Seriously, just have pay toilets. The people citing France are actually right. As disgusted as I was during my trip through Paris because of how dirty it was, the pay toilets were a shining beacon of cleanliness.
I love the idea of Occupy Potties. What do you say when you're doing your business and someone knocks on the door to the stall or bathroom? "Occupied!"
Seriously, just have pay toilets. The people citing France are actually right. As disgusted as I was during my trip through Paris because of how dirty it was, the pay toilets were a shining beacon of cleanliness.
Cross-posted from G+:
I agree with you in principle, though. Boston's been rolling out (though they've stopped recently) 25 cent toilets on the street (there's one near the public library in the Back Bay, and one near South Station, I think). Basically, you have 15 or 20 minutes to do your business, then it kicks you out, sanitizes itself, and is ready for the next person. It's an entirely self-cleaning system (maintenance is just repairing the nozzles every so often and refilling the sanitizing solution). It's done well enough that it's usable, without homeless people using them as 25 cent hotel rooms.
From what I've heard, they were pooping in paper bags and throwing it in the trash cans. That's pretty close.
Makes sense. Mate of mine is a truckie, and he keeps a stash of plastic supermarket bags in the cab for the same purpose. Though, he's not one of those assholes that throw it out the window, he keeps it in a bin in the cab until he can put them in a proper bin.
Put an electronic lock on the bathroom door. Every purchase in excess of the cost of a small cup of black coffee gets a unique code that expires in 15 minutes printed on the receipt. Feed the receipt into a scanner on the lock, the door unlocks, boom. No bouncers required, no more revolting bathrooms.
And the bathroom is still a poo-covered mess requiring constant cleaning. Also, anyone leaving the room will just hold the door open for the next person in line (or hovering near the door).
It would also be expensive to implement.
Whats the deal with the poop covered restrooms? You've mentioned it several times, are you people up north really that bad? Only time I've seen a poop covered bathroom is either at a sketchy gas station/truck stop or in a public school.
Anyway I don't care about Starbucks so much, but if other places start copying it, it will suck. Many a time I've had an emergency and had to stop at the closest place, usually a McDonalds or Starbucks or whatnot. Since I don't have a tube of flesh to help me aim in a bottle/cup, it makes it much harder to deal with.
Whats the deal with the poop covered restrooms? You've mentioned it several times, are you people up north really that bad? Only time I've seen a poop covered bathroom is either at a sketchy gas station/truck stop or in a public school.
There's a bunch of crazy homeless people here who have no place else to poop.
It's sad, but yeah, people don't clean up after themselves. It's not just a northern thing. It happens down south too.
It should be noted that this is pretty much just NYC, not all Starbucks locations. The city is a unique situation because there is so much foot traffic and buildings are so crowded in.
In Chicago, kids are taught not to shit up the bathrooms. Never been in a Starbucks that had a bathroom line or wasn't spotless. Fuck, even the McDonald's bathrooms are nice and sparkly.
During my visit to NYC this last weekend I set my facebook status to... "The thing about this town is that there are literally thousands of people trying to sell me a drink and but a handful of places to go bathroom."
How about we get a van with a toilet in the back of it and drive around the city with stopping for people with a couple of bucks that need to use it? It'd definitely play music as it travels so it'd be like a dark mirror image of an ice cream van.
During my visit to NYC this last weekend I set my facebook status to... "The thing about this town is that there are literally thousands of people trying to sell me a drink and but a handful of places to go bathroom."
How about we get a van with a toilet in the back of it and drive around the city with stopping for people with a couple of bucks that need to use it? It'd definitely play music as it travels so it'd be like a dark mirror image of an ice cream van.
That's almost the 21st century idea of the old profession of the dude walking around with a trench coat and a chamber pot. Pay him a couple quid and he'd wrap his coat around you while you did your business in the pot.
In Chicago, kids are taught not to shit up the bathrooms. Never been in a Starbucks that had a bathroom line or wasn't spotless. Fuck, even the McDonald's bathrooms are nice and sparkly.
Same here - while the majority of public bathrooms are not exactly a place you'd want to eat your lunch, they are still quite clean, even really high-traffic ones like shopping centers.
Comments
Starbucks is doing this because 1. Random schmucks come in off the street to use the restroom and nothing else that 2. Creates a line for the restroom which 3. hurts employees who can't pee on their breaks because the line is so long.
Now I'm not too worried about the people who, like you said, just get their drink and leave. Who I am worried about, and who will be most affected, are the malingerers, the people who come for the free wifi and therefore buy their drink and chill out. If they can use the restroom, they will, and maybe buy another drink (gasp! Daddy two-drinks?) By shutting down their restrooms these people aren't going to stay as long, or even at all, because if you're using free wifi you're not gonna be "in and out" as it were. By hurting these people they're hurting their business as they'll go somewhere else.
The other thing they can do (and my friend suggested) is give employees carte-blanche to jump the queue to the bathroom. In conjunction with the bouncer idea, I think it could work.
What do you say when you're doing your business and someone knocks on the door to the stall or bathroom?
"Occupied!"
I agree with you in principle, though. Boston's been rolling out (though they've stopped recently) 25 cent toilets on the street (there's one near the public library in the Back Bay, and one near South Station, I think). Basically, you have 15 or 20 minutes to do your business, then it kicks you out, sanitizes itself, and is ready for the next person. It's an entirely self-cleaning system (maintenance is just repairing the nozzles every so often and refilling the sanitizing solution). It's done well enough that it's usable, without homeless people using them as 25 cent hotel rooms.
But seriously, NYC really needs to do something about public restrooms. Maybe OWS should start pooping on the streets, to make a point.
The fucking ROMANS had better public infrastructure.
Anyway I don't care about Starbucks so much, but if other places start copying it, it will suck. Many a time I've had an emergency and had to stop at the closest place, usually a McDonalds or Starbucks or whatnot. Since I don't have a tube of flesh to help me aim in a bottle/cup, it makes it much harder to deal with.
:-P
It should be noted that this is pretty much just NYC, not all Starbucks locations. The city is a unique situation because there is so much foot traffic and buildings are so crowded in.
How about we get a van with a toilet in the back of it and drive around the city with stopping for people with a couple of bucks that need to use it? It'd definitely play music as it travels so it'd be like a dark mirror image of an ice cream van.