Ewwwwwwwwwwwww.

I hate stores that don't offer a restroom for customers.

OOOOOooo. Wow!! Sheesh. This is making is worse. That woman will never forget that day. Screw Jo-Ann's.

This is one thing that makes me turn away from mom-and-pop stores; they don't allow customers access to the bathrooms.

Yeah, I got that cut and paste form letter in e-mail from them.

Doesn't seem like much of an apology, or that they're going to try to make things right with the woman.

I think if I were her I'd be suing for pain and suffering.

Hmm... that response makes me wonder if they really understand the problem. Their employee was trained that violation of the customer bathroom policy was SO grave of an offense, nothing is worth violating it.

Rather than allow compassion, they changed the global policy completely to the other side. Which reintroduces all the problems that led them to restrict access in the first place.

@dbeahn: I am sorry for the woman that had to endure the embarrassment but I don't see any grounds for a lawsuit. Jo-Ann's Fabrics might be run by incompetents but they DID NOT cause her pain and suffering. They merely refused to help.

Disclaimer. I am not sticking up for them. I think this is despicable but it is hardly grounds for a lawsuit.

I really don't think an apology is enough, given the level of the embarrassment and humiliation she experienced.

I find it odd the claim that because of the unorthodox placement of restrooms, they limit customer use. I wonder which came first, the placement or the policy. Maybe they placed them so that they wouldn't have to allow customer use.

I also hope this wasn't an Alli "treatment effect".

I thought stores were required to have public restrooms unless they were in a mall that provided them?

I am pretty sure they do it as some sort of loss prevention policy. You know, to prevent those criminal stay at home moms from shoplifting scrap book craft supplies.

She should sue the (soiled) pants off of them.

I think we should have a Consumerist Bathroom Watch similar to the Nazi t-shirt watch at Wal-Mart.

"Everybody pile in, we're going to Jo-Ann's!"

@sohp101 These aren't "mom and pop" organizations... It's a nationwide company. That's why it has a CEO.

I'm Catherine W. and it seems Jo-Ann's has apologized to everyone but me. Maybe I should send them an email too.

Catherine W., the original poster, and I would like to say for the record that I DO NOT TAKE ALLI! I can't believe the number of people who think I'm taking that based on this incident. Also, I have no intention of suing them.

@niteflytes1:
I would imagine since you contacted them by mail, they are sending an apology by mail. Perhaps it will arrive in a day or two.

What is wrong with execs at large companies? I mean, really...any normal person in that job that suddenly has a gigantic cluster on their hands, like this situation, would IMMEDIATELY write, e-mail, call, carrier pigeon, or whatever to get a hold of the ACTUAL PERSON who was the focus of the awful support. After dealing with that, THEN you worry about press releases and apology letters to people that have no dog in the fight but you want to keep as customers.

*sigh* All pumping out some form letter without actually apologizing to the person involved does is make you look worse.

Moron.

This doesn't bode well for a business whose customers are predominantly female, i.e. pregnant women, older women, and women with children.

I think it is really offensive that so many people in the last thread and this thread are mentioning Alli as the cause. People had bowel problems well before Pharmaceuticals decided that explosive stools counted as a weight loss method. Why assume this accident is in any way related to Alli?

@niteflytes1: Don't take the Alli thing as any slam on you personally -- the Alli "treatment effects" have just been mentioned on the site lately, and people connected the dots.

It's incidents like this one that remind us customer service is as much, if not more, about individual employees as it is about company policy. I mean, did it really take a policy change to allow a customer with diarrhea to use a store restroom? I doubt it. That's just common sense and common decency. I've seen my share of retail employees who lacked one or both of those qualities.

I'm sure her pack of depends is in the mail.

JoAnn used to have restrooms available, up until probably a few months ago, and then the policy changed because the restrooms weren't "up to code". (Nationwide, I guess.)

I feel bad for the customer and -maybe- for the first clerk, who probably didn't see a huge problem at first and was concerned that they would fire her. (Yes, corporate policies can be inane and full of lawsuit fear.) But seriously, the manager should've just let her use it.

Here's the reason a good chunk of stores don't have public restrooms anymore: The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), which "prohibits the exclusion of people with disabilities from everyday activities," including shopping.

Professional Plaintiffs file ADA suits all the time, alleging a laundry list of access problems. These almost always include the bathrooms. Half the time (ore more) the Plaintiff has never actually been to the location, and definitely hasn't observed all the violations he alleged.

But that usually doesn't matter, because the allegations are RIGHT anyway. The ADA standards are REALLY strict, including things like the height of the handrail, depth of the counters, height of the soap dispenser, etc. etc.

Business owners know they're nailed on these things (pretty much every place in the USA is in violation, pretty much all the time), and since the ADA provides for attorney's fees and money penalties, there's usually a quick settlement. The store agrees to fix most of the violations, put up better signage about the things they can't reasonably fix; the Plaintiff gets a couple thousand bucks (or a donation to a disabilities-access charity); and so does her lawyer.

I'm not criticizing this system, really - it's more efficient at moving toward universal compliance than government action has proven, and the Plaintiffs and their lawyers are usually pretty reasonable, as are the defendants. Most businesses want to comply, so long as they can do so without driving themselves out of business.

BUT, one unintended consequence is that because (in California, anyway), you're not usually required to offer public bathrooms. Since those areas are some of the most expensive to remedy, and you can typically sell fabric, for example, without a public bathroom, a lot of ADA defendants will simply close down their public bathrooms altogether. Once the bathroom is no longer a public accommodation, it's no longer under the ADA and there's no obligation to remedy it. Since nobody gets to use the john, disabled people are treated exactly the same as the rest of the public.

Like I said - unintended consequences. And I bet Jo-Ann just bought itself about 300 access cases. Nice work.

And Chris wins the thread.

I'm torn. she obviously really needed the bathroom but i used to work at a place that only had an employee bathroom. we even had signs that said bathroom is for employees only but did this stop people from asking? no. one day, a lady was making a big deal about it so the manager asked me to escort her into the stockroom so she could use it. she had the nerve to complain about how dirty it was. I wasn't trying to be mean but i told her since there's only 1 bathroom and it looks like that, that's the reason we reserve it only for employees. It just bugged me. She wants to make a big deal about using the bathroom she wasn't entitled to and then complain that it wasn't good enough.

I used to work at a midwest Joann's (not in Indiana) during college. The restroom in my store was located in the backroom and its use was restricted to employees. Customers were allowed to use it if they requested but only if escorted by an employee . At times, when staffing was low and the store was busy and I did have to deny people from using the bathroom. I would direct people to other stores in the strip mall with public bathrooms. However, in an true emergency I don't think we would have denied anyone.

I'm sure that Catherine will get her letter. Also not all JoAnn's bathrooms are not restricted. For instance, the employee picture at the top is my sister. At her store the customers are escorted around the store if they ask for something. This also includes the bathrooms. That is the store's policy here in Chicago, IL.

@thbarnes: "I find it odd the claim that because of the unorthodox placement of restrooms, they limit customer use."

I worked at a store whose bathroom was in the skanky basement tucked sort-of behind the merchandise cages that you had to almost sidle to get to, and the entire basement was VERY ill-lit. The stairs were also very steep. We DEFINITELY limited customer access; the thing was several accidents waiting to happen. (Heck, it was perfectly clean, but none of the employees wanted to use it either because it was dark and scary and hard to get to.)

However, the store's policy was that when asked we would say, "We don't have a public restroom, but we can make the employees restroom available if this is an emergency" and the policy was that basically anything involving a child under 5 could qualify as "emergency." But the customer had to be escorted and escorting involved a lot of "watch your head -- don't trip on the stairs -- I'm sorry there's no more light ...."

Sometimes we recommended they go to the Walgreens next door that had customer-accessible bathrooms that didn't involve creepy basements and steep stairs. The Walgreens was very accommodating and always nice about letting our customers use their bathrooms, particularly if they were elderly or couldn't do stairs.

@bohemian: "I thought stores were required to have public restrooms unless they were in a mall that provided them?"

I think you're thinking of restaurants.

I used to work at a JoAnn's around 10 years ago. The bathroom was in the stock room and, since our store was tiny and overcrowded, it was surrounded by piles of merchandise that you had to step over and duck under to get to. We still allowed people to use the restroom, but they had to be escorted, which tied up an employee for however long the customer took in the restroom.

On the other hand, I also briefly worked at a new, large JoAnn's a couple years back, and they had public restrooms which were super-nice. So if there's a big Jo-Ann Superstore or Etc. near you, chances are they have a public restroom.

@dohtem: I agree, I'm sitting here trying to come up with grounds for a lawsuit, but Jo-Ann doesnt seem to be actionable here. Sucks, really sucks.

Hopefully, the negative PR machine will roll through their profits...my fiancee wont shop there anymore after I told her the story so that's two down.

I don't think there's ground for suit here or that even if there were, she should file suit. But come on JoAnn's, this woman is owed a personal apology at the very least.

That picture is classic.

Jo-Ann Fabrics is shooting themselves (with a button attacher, naturally) in the foot. The craft-folks of the world seem to be very connected and this story is already circulating.

If they keep this up, Dottie Hinkle is going to be the only person left shopping there.

35 years ago in a Chicago suburb, my epileptic sister--then 9 years old--suffered a grand mal seizure in a Jo-Ann Fabrics store and ended up with quite a mess in her pants since she couldn't control her bowels while seizing. Immediately before the seizure my mother had asked the employee if my sister could use the bathroom--she got the same "policy" story.

I understand stores need policies and can't offer a public restroom per se, but rules can and should be bent from time to time for people in need. Shame on Jo-Ann Fabrics.

Why doesn't Consumerist have a Hall of Shame? Jo-Ann Fabrics ought to be in there somewhere.

@bohemian: I know you say it mockingly, but middle aged women are the largest demographic of shoplifters, usually done for the thrill.

It doesn't really make sense for Jo-Ann's to apologize. The original story said that the store had gotten citations for having a hazardous bathroom and that they were told not to let anyone in there until it was fixed. So is Jo-Ann's saying that they will disregard any citations or restrictions? Essentially they are saying they will break the law to help a customer.

@timmus:

Why doesn't Consumerist have a Hall of Shame? Jo-Ann Fabrics ought to be in there somewhere.

Oh God, I can't believe I'm saying this, but Consumerist should send JoAnn one of those Golden Shit awards.

I wrote and complained... If I need something crafty, JoAnn's was where I WENT.

I have not received any communication from the company and I wrote them 2 days ago.

They should have dealt with Catherine first and then the public -- they don't even talk about her in the 'apology'.

having a bathroom in the store lets customers 'do their business' and continue shopping, rather than hurry up or leave without purchase because they can't hold their pee any longer. it's just sound business practice to keep customers in your store longer.

please don't mind while I wipe my ass with the fabrics!

"We're very sorry for any frustration and embarrassment..."? -- Anybody who really thinks that being denied so much as a hole to **** in on an extreme emergency basis constitutes no worse than frustration and embarassment for the average non-senile adult, needs to live with a really vicious case of colitis for awhile so they can get a first-hand perspective. This little sorry-note to emailers has been vetted by legal so as to concede nothing that could be construed as - you know - emotional pain and suffering.

@Jerim: Where does it say they got citations or that it was hazardous?

She again said no and quoted a recent policy change regarding the rest room facilities not being up to code and that they were not allowed to let customers use the rest room.

JoAnne's sucks alright.
I was at a Joanne's with my mom to buy some material for bridal shower candy doo dads (favors?). There was a sign posted immediately above the bolt of material with an arrow pointing right to it saying 50% off. When I went to pay it rang at full price so I mentioned the sign. The sales lady said it wasn't on sale and marched over to the sign and said it was meant for the material below mine. I said it was pointing right to the one I was buying. She angrily tore the sign off and said, "There. Now nothing's on sale!" I was dumbstruck. Could she have been offended that my mom and I were speaking to each other in Spanish as we shopped? I rarely feel discriminated against (I'm a 3rd generation Mexican American and speak 'Taco Bell' Spanish).
Needless to say, I was jumping for joy when they went out of business recently.

@dbeahn: Yup, just what the courts need-another lawsuit from someone who was embarrassed. I feel sorry for the woman, but having worked retail on and off for years, I know why most stores don't provide customer restrooms. Has to do with customer theft.

Stores that don't allow bathroom access are annoying, especially for parents. I'm surprised stores, especially grocery stores and gas stations, don't have this avaialble. There was a grocery store in Alabama, where I lived for 2 years, that did not allow the public access to thier restrooms. I never gave them business after that first shopping experience there.

I don't necessarily agree that a store's bathroom has to be accessible to EVERYONE. Many petty thieves try to get access to a bathroom to steal something, and shoplifting is already rampant. However, I used to work at a store with an employees only bathroom, and we would allow children with their parents to use it, and if someone told me what this woman told the clerk at JAF, I certainly would have let her use it! That's just common decency. If I were that woman, I probably would have used some fabrics from the store to clean up. Poor lady.

This woman should get her apology. But what I would like to know is when do most businesses realize that people have babies. Install those little changing tables in the mens room. I hate going into our local McDonalds and have to change my daughter in the car.

Course, I have more respect than the mother I saw changing her child on the table. EEEWWWW

Re: Joann's,
I feel for the woman and she should have been allowed to use the bathroom. but..

The company's policy should not be whats the problem, the employee actions should

The ADA argument in California anyway, is very real. Ive seen small business' go out of business because of multiple ADA scammer lawyers who will go away for a few thousand dollars

hmm I used to work in a store that had a employee bathroom but it was in the back room, and since we were always overflowed with inventory stock and other crap,(no pun intended) many of the stock ended up in the bathroom. so letting customers in there where there are no security cams and tons of stuff that can be conceiled was just asking for theft.

Isn't bringing about a big ol' lawsuit bringing more attention to her than if she had just went in her pants, was embarrassed for the day, complained to the store manager, and then moved on? People confuse me.

@nidolke: That's a great point. "I was SOOOOOOOOOO embarrassed and humiliated!!! -- Here, let me go on TV and tell you all about it..."