Do School Trip Fees subsidise non-payers?

Janepig

Person_one wrote: »

Don't believe everything you hear/read.

I don't, which is why my opinion is as valid as the next person and based on real life experience.

Jx

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Janepig wrote: »

I know how free school meals works thanks. And see my other post, it's one less bill to pay.

Surely lighting, heating and furniture would come out of your main income, not CB. My CB goes into a separate bank account so I can use it for clothes, uniform and trips,etc, for my two. Time was it all went into one pot, but in these straightened times I find I have to keep a closer eye on where everything is going.

Jx

Well, I'm not convinced you do, seeing as you see it as having extra cash. It's not. It's given precisely because it is legally acknowledged that those benefit levels are not enough to be able to pay for school meals as well. So there isn't an extra bundle of tenners around, as there wasn't enough to begin with.



And everything went into one account; it would have been stupid to differentiate between which £12 went to pay for which. It certainly isn't labelled 'school uniform and trips benefit', for a start. Children need heating, lighting, food, clothes, equipment for school and a whole lot more. I couldn't say 'oh dear, it's a bit cold this week, but I can't use the ChB for that, as that's supposed to be used to keep the other parents happy that we're not scroungers; I'll just have to let them freeze'.


As it is, remembering the school trip days, there were always some complete prats who believed that the DDs were getting trips free because they qualified for FSM. What actually had happened was that the school gave me slightly longer to pay in installments, instead of expecting the money to be paid by the Tuesday following a letter coming out on Friday afternoon.

Things were much easier when I was working, rather than being ill. Partly because neither myself or my children had to deal with petty judgements like the ones on here.

GwylimT

I arranged a trip last year for 32 children, the coach cost £440, if a trip is vital, school will subsidise the cost, those who don't pay are paid for by school, however this only happens for x amount of trips. Our school will fund two trips per child (if they are receiving free school meals) but no more.

Janepig

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Well, I'm not convinced you do, seeing as you see it as having extra cash. It's not. It's given precisely because it is legally acknowledged that those benefit levels are not enough to be able to pay for school meals as well. So there isn't an extra bundle of tenners around, as there wasn't enough to begin with.



And everything went into one account; it would have been stupid to differentiate between which £12 went to pay for which. It certainly isn't labelled 'school uniform and trips benefit', for a start. Children need heating, lighting, food, clothes, equipment for school and a whole lot more. I couldn't say 'oh dear, it's a bit cold this week, but I can't use the ChB for that, as that's supposed to be used to keep the other parents happy that we're not scroungers; I'll just have to let them freeze'.


As it is, remembering the school trip days, there were always some complete prats who believed that the DDs were getting trips free because they qualified for FSM. What actually had happened was that the school gave me slightly longer to pay in installments, instead of expecting the money to be paid by the Tuesday following a letter coming out on Friday afternoon.

Things were much easier when I was working, rather than being ill. Partly because neither myself or my children had to deal with petty judgements like the ones on here.

I said it was a bill FSM parents don't have to pay.

Chip on shoulder?

Jx

silvercar

My kids' schools (3 schools in total) all worked on the basis that those that couldn't afford the cost of the trip would be asked what they could afford to contribute and whether they needed a flexible payment plan. There was no blanket rule that FSM equalled free school trips. The Bursars would soon get to know which children would struggle to pay and which wouldn't, they would also very quickly work out who were the parents that could pay but chose not to.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Janepig wrote: »

I said it was a bill FSM parents don't have to pay.

Chip on shoulder?

Jx

But it doesn't mean they have extra money around as a result to be spending on things that aren't intended to be included in the basket of goods that is used to calculate appropriate benefit levels.



[checks shoulder]

Nope. Haven't had a takeaway in ages.

Nicki

A crap parent who would refuse to pay for a school trip when they can afford to do so, is unlikely I would suggest to give a flying stuff whether their child is allowed to go on the trip or not. So the one who will suffer in those circumstances is only the child, not the parent.

A parent whether on FSM or not, who just cannot find £8 for the trip will care if their child is singled out, as will the child but can do nothing about it.

In both cases the only person to suffer is the child.

I personally don't mind paying what is requested for the school trip and just mind my own business as to what others do. I would not see ANY child, whatever the parent is like, singled out and left behind from a trip. What a completely shameful thing for some of you to suggest should be done to a primary school aged child as a result of something outside their control.

Am wondering whether some on this thread think that the FSM children in their school should wear a different coloured uniform, and those with flaky parents perhaps a badge saying "my parents don't rate me much" just in case their classmates have up until now missed the point that they are not as fortunate as other kids?

Seanymph

Nicki we need to have something bigger than a 'thanks' post - I think your post is awesome.

peachyprice

Janepig wrote: »

Chip on shoulder?

Now that is ironic.

silvercar

Janepig wrote: »

I said it was a bill FSM parents don't have to pay.

Chip on shoulder?

Jx

Axe to grind?

Why can't people see that a bill you don't have to pay does not equate to having the cash available to spend? Yes FSM means no £40 pmpc bill, but that is because those entitled would not have that £40 to pay in the first place.

and yes I understand there are people who haven't got the £40 who either have to find it from other budgets or supply packed lunches at a cost or their kids go without, but that doesn't mean that those on FSM have £40 to spend!