Legal action against School due to the cost of School uniforms, Please advise

Tiddlywinks

pigpen wrote: »

You are aware that in state primary schools a uniform is not enforceable.. so you are within your rights to send her to school in whatever you like and if the head doesn't like it.. tough!!!

.... Great life lesson to give a child... "Yeah, there are rules but they don't apply to you"... :think:

Everyone knows their 'rights' whilst forgetting their responsibilities.

pigpen

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

.... Great life lesson to give a child... "Yeah, there are rules but they don't apply to you"... :think:

Everyone knows their 'rights' whilst forgetting their responsibilities.

They don't apply to any child!!! It is the teaching staff with the attitude problems who need to remember this.

They aren't 'rules' they are recommendations..

Tiddlywinks

pigpen wrote: »

They don't apply to any child!!! It is the teaching staff with the attitude problems who need to remember this.

They aren't 'rules' they are recommendations..

They are the "rules of the game" for that school so children don't need a mixed message about it being OK to pick and choose what they want to comply with.

Children need to be taught about boundaries and compliance - there is a time and a place for freedom of expression but flouting uniform policy is not a useful way to do this for the child or the school.

If parents don't like the rules then they should use the usual channels to raise concerns or go elsewhere... rather than disrupt everyone else.

embob74

DD is due to start high school in September and the school has recently been refurbished and has a new uniform. Existing students have had 2 years grace to implement the new uniform.
Is this not something the school could do? Perhaps introduce a new jumper for existing students and new students wear all the new uniform. Is the OP being asked to but the uniform for her children now or for September? It is usual to buy all new uniform in September anyway.
In primary I bought the school logo jumper and all other bits were basic blouse, trousers etc.

Own_My_Own wrote: »

By wearing a uniform, you are saving on wear and tear on his other clothes. It also stops poorer children being picked on for not having designer gear.
I personally think that £45 is reasonable.

£45 isn't too bad but uniform does not stop children knowing who are the "poor" kids in the class. My DD was friends with a girl who's mother preferred to spend her benefit money on wine rather than uniform and her trousers were quite a few inches above her socks and her shoes had so many holes they could be flip-flops. It was very visible that the child's uniform was not to the standard of others probably due to the cost of replacing it.

DD's school skirt is priced at £30 :eek: which I feel is extortionate (I would have to think twice to pay that much for a skirt for myself which could potentially be worn for years).

As for the comments re: 'it's parents fault for choosing that school' - I opted for another school but we were allocated this one so not really a choice as such and if we put any other school then we would not be entitled to free school transport. I did try to find out the cost of uniform prior to putting the school as a choice but as it was a new uniform suppliers and price info wasn't yet available. It was only at the intro meeting that they had the 2 suppliers showing the uniform and giving out price lists. The majority of parents stood near us were complaining about the cost.
Uniform has become one of my bugbears since older DD went to a school that sent pupils home if they did not have the logo shirt. I'm disgusted at a school being more interested in making parents hand over their money than actually educating the kids.
I also can't fathom out the reasoning behind disallowing certain hairstyles. I've never known of any link to how you learn and the style of hair you have!!

OP - I think the first step if you decided to pursue your legal battle would be to decide what law the school have breached/haven't applied - I don't actually think there is anything in law which covers it

pigpen

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

They are the "rules of the game" for that school so children don't need a mixed message about it being OK to pick and choose what they want to comply with.

school isn't a game. Rules/laws are to be upheld.. other peoples preferences and guidelines.. are optional. Unless we want to breed sheep who blindly do what everyone else wants them to do they are taught to think for themselves. And yes guidelines you can pick and choose which you comply with.

As it is, my children always wear uniform.. it is easier for me, it is that simple, there is no 'what shall I wear?' in a morning .. My oldest did once say .. 'but uniform isn't compulsory at primary school'.. and I replied.. 'it is in this house' lol..

Children need to be taught about boundaries and compliance - there is a time and a place for freedom of expression but flouting uniform policy is not a useful way to do this for the child or the school.

They are.. but there is no uniform 'policy' at any primary school it is a preference of the staff/governing body.. high school is different obviously with the uniform being enforceable.. At the high school mine are at they send them home if their socks are the wrong colour! Totally ridiculous. I know 1 child who was told they had to colour in a tiny stripe on their brand new shoes because they weren't all black.. there is a point where they take these things too far!

If parents don't like the rules then they should use the usual channels to raise concerns or go elsewhere... rather than disrupt everyone else.

The usual channels being.. speak to the head, tell him he can't enforce a uniform at primary school and to get over himself.. I quite agree!..

how many children complain they couldn't possibly do their work because the child next to them had a motif on their sock??.. in fact usually it is the gestapo staff that create any disruption by humiliating a child!.. Taking a small girl out of assembly to berate her about her tights is disgraceful.. He would have had a flea in his ear had it been my daughter!

Half the children at the school I just removed mine from had never even heard of uniform!

pigpen

embob74 wrote: »

My DD was friends with a girl who's mother preferred to spend her benefit money on wine rather than uniform and her trousers were quite a few inches above her socks and her shoes had so many holes they could be flip-flops. It was very visible that the child's uniform was not to the standard of others probably due to the cost of replacing it.

Many schools have a child protection type person on the staff who have a small budget to help children in difficult circumstances like this.. If parents are struggling for whatever reasons they can help. There have been a few cases I know of where children have had uniform pieces donated due to family circumstances (perks of being a governor you learn about these things)

FBaby

All very well to send your child in their own clothes all for the sake of saving £50 a year. Personally, I think £50 is more than its worth to avoid my child being teased, questioned and labelled.

Marker_2

There are two points brought up on the thread I would like to address:

1. Those who state the cost of uniform can be instead of extra normal clothes because the child will be wearing uniform 5 days a week is wrong - unless of course when your child finishes school they go home and get straight into their pj's. Most kids get dressed into normal clothes when they come home from school, so uniform isn't really a substitute ... it's on top of!

2. And secondly a uniform in effect stopping bullying of the 'poorer' kids. That is nothing more than wishful thinking. If a parent can't afford to replace normal tatty clothes, what makes you think they are able to replace tatty uniform.

Many many people on this thread are comparing the cost of their school uniform to the OP and telling her to stop 'whinging' cos it's cheap compared to yours. Just because it is cheaper, doesn't make it anymore affordable for some parents. It is all relevant.

Some parents are spending over a £100 on one outfit,and not battering a n eyelid because it's uniform. Would you spend £100 on any other outfit for your child (minus special occasions) I highly doubt it!.

£45 for an outfit is alot and that is minus shoes. And kids being kids, the chances of them being scuffed, lost, stolen is high as well.

FBaby

1. My kids have never changed into normal clothing after school and I don't know any of their friends who do.

2. It's not so much about tatty clothes but about avoiding the pressure of designer clothes.

3. Everything is available when you make it a priority.

I wouldn't want to spend £100 on an outfit, but if that's what I had to do for my kids to attend the school of my choice, then I would accept it, along with the cost of trips and all those things I would rather not spend my money on.

delain

pigpen wrote: »

Many schools have a child protection type person on the staff who have a small budget to help children in difficult circumstances like this.. If parents are struggling for whatever reasons they can help. There have been a few cases I know of where children have had uniform pieces donated due to family circumstances (perks of being a governor you learn about these things)

Our primary has only just started with second hand uniform sales, but before that the pastoral care lady was happy to take outgrown uniform and give it to families who needed it.

Also when the school leave 'lost property' to be 'reclaimed' at the end of term a teacher took me aside (we were having money trouble at the time) and said please take anything you need as anything left today is going to be binned.

Actually the uniform sales where everything is 50p have been hugely popular. I dont want to pay £16.50 for a cardigan that twin2 is just going to chew to death in a couple of months because the teachers don't seem to see her doing it!