To be cross about paying for school trips....

[fulltimeworkingmum]

..for DC's when other children can still go whether their parents stump up or not?

We received a letter from school about an upcoming trip to the theatre for DD. It stated the cost (£7) and then stated that " no child will be disadvantaged because of a parent's inability or unwillingness to pay"

I have no issue at all with people who really cannot afford it (though £7 is only a little more than a packet of ciggies) the bit about "unwillingness to pay" has really cheesed me off. The school does not clarify this any further and I am left with the impression that we who are prepared to pay are subsidising those who are not.
When I was at school in the eighties - a while ago , I admit but still within recent memory, if your parents did not pay for the trip, you did not go, end of story.
DD is in her first year at school so this is all new to me.

[SauvignonBlanche]

Yeah, make them stay at school, that'll teach them!

[muggglewump]

Why the ciggies comparison?

[Portofino]

Not sure what the ciggies have to do with anything! You sound most judgy and unpleasant imho. If you can afford to pay, then please do so with good grace. If you can't then, hey, your dd will not be disadvantaged.

[nameymcnamechange]

What is happening is that we who are prepared to pay are subsidising the trip for the children whose parents are not prepared to pay.

If you want to discriminate against children whose parents couldn't give a shit about them then feel free to do so.

If you would rather give a disadvantaged child a break and let them have a nice day out then keep schtum and pay up. Look on it as a tiny act of charity.

This is all completely aside from the parents who cannot pay of course - that is an entirely separate issue.

[LaurieScaryCake]

yabu - simply for linking the 'ciggies' reference in for some people they really can't afford it - it's not about cigarettes or that.

You should be pleased you can afford to pay - I am pleased when I can afford it.

[amidaiwish]

you are not subsidising them, the governors will have a fund they use for "hardship" payments.

it is not the child's fault after all.

[Tidey]

DS's school trip letters say something like 'we ask for a voluntary contribution of £10 per child but funds do not exist in school to pay for this trip'.

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

7 quid is a lot if you are on benefits and the trip is happening at the wrong time of the week/month/year whatever. It might coincide with DC needing a new coat.

YOU are not paying any extra for your child to go so why should it bother you?

Another case of this weird reverse jealousy that is so prevelant these days.

Being envious of those who have less than you.

If some twat of a mother cant be arsed to fork out for the trip why punish the child, they probably have enough to cope with.

Just be happy that you can manage it and that your kids have a caring mother.

[BreconBeBuggered]

Oh, nasty dig from your school at those who are frankly taking the piss. There are contingency funds available to pay for educational trips if your family is on a low income, but some parents who could well afford the sums involved plead poverty, while genuinely poor people often pay up out of pride or embarrassment. You won't be subsidising the non-payers, though, as the school is only allowed to charge you what the trip costs them per child.

[ComingDownTheChimmley]

yes deprive a child and stigmatise them to boot

lovely

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

AND most school trips are subsidised anyway. So even the better off families are getting something cheap.

My DS went to Italy a couple of years ago. IT cost us about 300 quid. That was hard for us to get together but it would have cost loads more if he wasnt going with the school.

[TrillianAstra]

YABU for talking about 'ciggies'.

If someone can't afford to pay, would you leave their chld out?

If someone can afford to pay but doesn't want to for whatever reason, would you leave their child out, when it is not the child's decision?

[MissAnneElk]

YABU. If not enough parents pay then the trip will be cancelled. I've always paid for my DDs trips but I am aware that not all parents can afford it. I'm a bit at your packet of fags comment.
This only applies to trips within the school day so try not to worry, poor children won't be allowed to go skiing with your DD ...
You're not subsidising BTW the school are not allowed to charge extra to cover those who can't or won't pay.

[Portofino]

I was in school in the 80s. My Russian O'level class did a trip to Moscow. My friend, whose mother really couldn't afford it. got to go - the fund paid. My family probably could afford it, but had other plans for the cash. I didn't go. Them's the breaks....

[soggy14]

We are unwilling to pay for school trips. We are not poor but with several children it adds up and we would rather pay for us all to go as a family to places which we want to go to than for the school to take them individually to places that the either do not want to go to or to where they have already been. The last school trip that ds went on was to a local zoo of which we are members anyway. Why should we pay once for our family membership and again for the school to take him?

[ComingDownTheChimmley]

I want the OP to explain what she meant by the packet of fags comment

Is it shorthand for something, are we to infer anything from it?

Thank you

[bubbleOseven]

wise words from nameymnnamechange that I totally agree with.

Just wanted to ask though, purely out of curiosity, how do parents actually know that they aren't being charged more than the school is paying?

[DinahRod]

This is an increasing issue at dcs' school where a significant small minority of parents don't pay - we're "mugs" one mother told me if we do pay because the "school will cover it". It's absolutely right to subsidise students whose parents are not in a position to afford it but am starting to feel a bit irked at subsidising the can't be arsed.

[Hassled]

I think the OP's point isn't about those who will struggle to pay, it's about those parents who are unwilling to pay.

And I can see her point, tbh - there are always parents who have some sort of moral/"I pay my taxes, why should I pay any more?" objection, and they are always the parents who give the impression that they could spare the £7 or whatever fairly easily (yes, I know, that impression could be false). And so the overall cost of the trip rises, because the fact that there are those parents is "built in" to the calculations, and the really skint parents end up paying more.

And yes of course the child of the "I pay my taxes" parents should go regardless. It's just annoying.

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

Well 7 quid is only a little less than a pair of fake uggs
or
Would pay for a few sessions on a sunbed
Or
could keep you in generic Red Bull for a couple of weeks
Or
Would pay for a few ready meals for the kiddie's teas

etc

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

And how much is a rock these day?

[muggglewump]

It's because those skint parents always smoke, oh and have flatscreen TV's obv

[muggglewump]

What's a rock?

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

Crack.

Cos all us chavs love a bit of crack and feck the kiddie's school trips innit

[muggglewump]

And my fake Uggs were £5 a pair (I have two.