schools opening when it has snowed!

johnnyl

mrcow wrote: »

If you are seriously suggesting that it doesn't have an impact, then you are woefully naive.
.

nope, i havent said that. Come back to me when you can be bothered reading what I have actually put. If you cant be bothered to do that, fine, thats your decision but dont reply or claim that I have said things that I havent.

gregg1

johnnyl wrote: »

Maybe you should use your eyes, I said above KS1.

There are no class size limits for children above the age of 7 nor are there any adult supervision ratios set out in law. And while we are on the subject, google was my search engine however my source of information was the DofEd and the NUT, I'd suggest that they know what they are on about. More than some on here it seems who either dont, or have been telling bare faced lies.

The reality of the situation here is that it is perfectly legal for most schools to run with a slightly less than perfect ratio. It isnt set in tablets of stone and they are perfectly able to stay open. They dont need to know in advance EXACTLY how many children will be there and how many staff. It is the easy option to just shut them

Actually have to disagree again (sorry). Most main stream schools have children with varying statement of needs which require different staffing levels and supervision so they do need to have a fairly good idea of ratios on any given day.

Valli

The head doesn't decide to shut because the staff 'won't turn up'; the head decides to shut because of the conditions and then informs the staff not to turn in.

So, no, you haven't addressed that point.

johnnyl

gregg1 wrote: »

Actually have to disagree again (sorry). Most main stream schools have children with varying statement of needs which require different staffing levels and supervision so they do need to have a fairly good idea of ratios on any given day.

No, and this is a key point here. It was explicitly stated on here that it is a legal requirement. That was the challenge to my point. When I asked why the schools had to shut there were numerous references to it being the only work place obliged by law to have staffing ratios.

This has since been shown to be false.

mrcow

johnnyl wrote: »

nope, i havent said that. Come back to me when you can be bothered reading what I have actually put. If you cant be bothered to do that, fine, thats your decision but dont reply or claim that I have said things that I havent.

Hopefully your school will open tomorrow and it will put a temporary stop on your inane childish rantings.

You obviously don't understand how certain businesses work. To suggest that one of the largest banks in the world could be shut down because of snow fall in one of its resident countries is so laughable, it's actually worrying.

johnnyl

Valli wrote: »

The head doesn't decide to shut because the staff 'won't turn up'; the head decides to shut because of the conditions and then informs the staff not to turn in.

So, no, you haven't addressed that point.

go back 10 nor so pages.

If the conditions are the issue then manage the conditions like many many other places do to reduce the risk.

There are hand push along ploughs that will clear walkways in 20 or so minutes, a bit of grit down and the jobs a good un.

gregg1

johnnyl wrote: »

No, and this is a key point here. It was explicitly stated on here that it is a legal requirement. That was the challenge to my point. When I asked why the schools had to shut there were numerous references to it being the only work place obliged by law to have staffing ratios.

This has since been shown to be false.

I am not sure about the legalities of it so can't comment on that. However, schools do have a duty to comply with any given child's statement of needs. Now I am not sure if that is a legal requirement or not but I do know that schools would be setting themselves up for trouble if they did not comply with the child's needs as set out in that statement.

I will leave it at that though. We will have to agree to disagree.

Valli

Round we go again.

It's NOT the conditions on the school site; it's the roads, the buses, infrastructure, the fact that people (staff and pupils) may have a long distance to travel to get to the school, the fact that, were the pupils to be snowed in there would not be sufficient food for them (or, in some Primary Schools which don't have their own kitchens, ANY food)...

anyway, isn't it past your bedtime?

johnnyl

gregg1 wrote: »

I am not sure about the legalities of it so can't comment on that. However, schools do have a duty to comply with any given child's statement of needs. Now I am not sure if that is a legal requirement or not but I do know that schools would be setting themselves up for trouble if they did not comply with the child's needs as set out in that statement.

however that is my point, it is a judgement call not set in stone. Several people on here have pitched their argument around it being set in stone yet now it appears that it isnt. The whole claim was that it is non-optional.

Valli

johnnyl wrote: »

it is a judgement call not set in stone. .

And called by the Heads. Not the staff;)

Mr. Cow - you don't need to be so polite; since that poster has already been rude; if he gives it out, he can take it;)