Controversial Behaviour Policy changes

He's only allowed to remove his blazer(and jumper in winter term)when invited to in class by the teacher, which only happens in the height of summer, and has to wear both at all other times.
Sounds terrible. My child would be too hot to focus on learning in a jumper and blazer. His jumper bought a year ago has never been worn. Are you in a very cold part of the UK?

With respect, the fact that only persistently disruptive or destructive students were being punished before is probably the reason why behaviour was so poor. Persistent knee-bouncing after being asked to stop and persistently not SLANTing would probably get a detention in most schools where behaviour is generally very good. It certainly would at my school, although we don’t use the term SLANT. When some kids are throwing chairs and telling you to fuck off you don’t tend to worry about that sort of thing but when the rest of the class are focused, facing forward, sitting up straight and engaging with questions someone slouching or knee bouncing or staring out of the window after repeated requests to stop start to just look plain rude and disrespectful.
Punishing stuttering and left-handedness is utterly reprehensible though.

The issue I guess is that you have to sign a behaviour policy. I wouldn't sign this. I also wonder given there is provision for appealing school admissions would a parent be able to appeal if they didn't feel their child would cope with this.

Schools can’t ask teachers to work in their lunch break.

There definitely was been behavioural issues with students at the school, but my teen was thriving academically in the top set

They’re not going to be able to implement school rules and then say that they don’t apply to the top set.

Complain about the lunch thing, that seems perfectly valid.

But if behaviour is poor outside of the top set, imagine what you’d want to happen if your DS was in bottom set and struggling to work.

My school isn’t super strict. We don’t lock classrooms, the kids have an awful lot of freedom at break and lunch and the corridor rules are very relaxed. But... we’re a school where behaviour has always been excellent. Even back 10 years ago when I started and our overall Ofsted grade was only “good” behaviour had been “outstanding” for many years. Our students largely come from immigrant families who place a high value on education and who are incredibly supportive of whatever rules we put in place. In some schools the level of low level disruption is such that these sorts of rules are needed to allow kids to learn.
With regards to Michaela school, which always comes up on these threads, their behaviour policy is central to their ethos and, if you read it, nowhere near as extreme as the press have suggested it is. The focus on silence in the corridors isn’t something I’d personally bother about if I ran a school but the rest of their behaviour policy is not especially draconian in my opinion, especially for in-class behaviour. They do expect students to SLANT etc, but students aren’t just given detention for glancing out of a window. Before they are given a “demerit” they are first given a non-verbal reminder, a verbal but unnamed reminder and then a named reminder. Students have a number of chances to stop slouching/chatting/fiddling/staring out of the window. It sounds very similar to the way we do things in my pretty relaxed school.

Chattonnoire

The teacher, (Boney my teen confirmed it was definitely a teacher from another class, not one of his regular ones from the year) was struggling with controlling his temper, he has previously demonstrated very extreme emotional reactions at the school

The thing that you have glossed over what must have gone on before in order for the teacher to lose his temper, It sounds to me that the behaviour of the majority of the pupils is very poor and management is finally trying to claw back some semblance of order from the chaos.

Chattonnoire
I am questioning why these "problem" students (the ones consistently disruptive and getting excluded), are not obliged to go to a school meant for taking these issues, rather than shuffled onto another school to repeat the cycle?

As does every parent and teacher that I know.
The system is built around the biggest return for the lowest input.
Schools for children that misbehave costs money and lots of it. more so the appeals from the parents adamant that their child has done nothing to end up in such a place.

What did they do at lunch last year?

Parents may be unwillingly assigned a school for their children where behaviour is out of control and results are terrible. That’s also an issue.

Given that these schools seem to be becoming more common and parents may be assigned them unwillingly it's an issue. The OP didn't choose this.

Have you ever considered that one school is not representative of all schools and people in the workplace are adults who are paid to be there?

I'm not bothered at all about noise in the corridors between lessons as long as it is just chat and not coming from aggression, screaming etc. I think children need a chance to chat during the school day, just as adults do during the working day. Surely there's a middle way between a free for all in the corridors and the kids moving round silent and expressionless like the zombie crowd scenes in Shaun of the Dead?

We managed it and my school wasn't brilliant. People at work also seem to be able to negotiate crowded and often obstructed corridors (I work in a hospital) without problems.

Hundreds of kids walking along next to each other chatting down corridors will be noisy and jostley even if they aren’t fighting or being arseholes. And chatty kids tend to be slow kids who are late to lessons.

People who start fights, trip people, slam into people and actually cause trouble. Not someone walking along talking to a friend or smiling at someone coming in the opposite direction.

Every parent draws the line of 'acceptable behaviour' in a different place. In most cases, it is just a bit below their own child's behaviour. Some of these rules are ridiculous - of course teens need a physical break from sitting in a chair. But equally, "no excuses" for low-level disruption is perfectly reasonable (provided reasonable adjustments are made for students with SEN). The amount of lesson time wasted on dealing with chatting or repeating instructions for kids who weren't listening can be ridiculous.

And most teachers would absolutely love those who are persistently disruptive to be properly dealt with. But equally exclusion should be a last resort, and specialist schools for children with behaviour problems are hugely expensive.

Chattonnaire - it sounds awful that they aren’t allowed to leave their seat at break time, and also unhealthy! At my DDs Secondary school they have clubs at break time or are allowed outside to walk around. I would be extremely unhappy with this policy. I think you are right to question it.

If you don’t want corridors to be noisy or silent, who will you be punishing?