To wonder if its fair that some forces children get fees paid at private schools?

[scruffybird]

A few old friends of mine have their children at good private boarding schools due to ninety percent of the fees being paid for by the forces. I am perfectly aware that I may be being unreasonable for even questioning this, but it just seems wrong?
One of the girls has gone to a school hundreds of miles away from where her family live so that she would be eligible.

g33k: I wish you would read the thread - why internationally mobile staff receive a mitigation has been repeatedly answered.

And (re:tax) perhaps read your own posts: or did you not expect someone to respond when you asked "Can you break down the amount paid by members of the armed forces in tax in relation to the benefit received?" (You need to look at the DASA webpage, BTW - all the info is there).

G33k. Would you want all single armed forces then? We need a range of skill both technical and personal in our forces. We need them to have support of families to keep them going/sane.

"And (re:tax) perhaps read your own posts: or did you not expect someone to respond when you asked "Can you break down the amount paid by members of the armed forces in tax in relation to the benefit received?" (You need to look at the DASA webpage, BTW - all the info is there)."

There does not seem much point in continuing to respond as you lot don't seem capable of coherent or educated argument. Strawmen and emotional anecdotes abound.
I did not ask for what was paid in tax; I asked for a ratio breakdown of tax:benefit. This would also include the reduced pension contributions, housing costs, relocation costs etc. These are not available to other large groups within the public sector.

Foolish? Not all trades are Infantry. Not everyone can see into the future and know that 12+ years from when they join they would see active service. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to dump a pension they are a couple of years away from qualifying for to seek civilian employment in a recession.

Your views are very simplistic, it isn't a black and white issue.

And what 'benefits' do you think Forces families get?!

And you were signposted to the exact place where all the information was.

Why you asked the question in such a hostile manner in the first place (when the poster you were reacting to had only said that they were taxpayers) is a more interesting question. You are being confounded by your own straw man.

And you have been ignoring all the answers about why this mitigation is available internationally mobile Government staff and many in the private sector. Disappointing.

It is a perk, but of all the people who have taken advantage of this, that I know of... all have bought a house locally in the area and had no plans to move (or at least the wifes/girlfrinds saty put) so the children wouldn't of moved while in secondary education. So it sort of seems like they were taking the piss, but who can blame them if its on offer

How wonderful to see yet more armed-forces bashing on MN [hmn]

My serving RAF husband and his Royal Marine brother, who saw 2 of his friends blown to pieces in Afghanistan and came home with severe hearing damage, are so very touched to know they have your support.

Isn't the divorce rate amongst forces marriages something like double the civilian population? So splitting up for unaccompanied postings puts huge strain on a marriage.

I went to five different schools at primary before going to boarding school at secondary because my Dad was in the forces.

I could wind you up more by telling you we got free flights at every school holiday to Brunei,Hong Kong and Germany and we had considerably longer holidays than state schools.

Those were the days.

Indulgence flights are what I remember, but if an important package came along, you were bounced off the plane.
All those hours sleeping in the lounge at Brize...

TBH I think you'd have to be a bit dim to join the army and take on the moral responsibility for all the atrocities that involves just to get your kid into a posh school... Though as others have said, I think the reason for it is that army workers move around a lot. Not that anyone is able to stay in the same place and work post-Thatcher-economy-destruction and with all the temporary contracts now, anyway.

Cavemum, maybe they should have refused to go like lots of decent army employees did knowing it was an unjust war, then? Sorry, but people who kill for money don't have my sympathy!

Downby the terminal at Brize was much more comfy when I was there last month!

I don't remember the term 'indulgence flights',we just got sent off on a train from school to Heathrow and the ground hostesses put us on the right flight...sometimes Quantas when we were going to Brunei and had to stay overnight at an hotel in Singapore were more ground hostesses took over and put us on another flight to Brunei the following day.

Why don't the wife stay home and look after the children while they go to a normal school.

Or is it because the wife would rather be with her husband than her children?

Wibbly not everyone in the Forces kills for a living, at least the last time I heard, Doctors, Medics and Padres are non combatant. And I am sure the Air Traffic controllers in all 3 Services are a bit busy to be gun totin'.

How is Afghanistan an unjust war??!! It was UN sanctioned I think you'll find.

To trot out the line for the umpteenth time, it is the politicians who take the decisions on where the armed forces are sent, not the serving men/women themselves.

For future reference, there are 3 forces, not just "the army". Calling a Royal Marine "army" is the fastest route to a kick in the pants!

Yes, yes Nikon, "why don't the wife stay at home"? Let's go back to the 1950s, shall we? What about couples who are both serving in the army?

I've worked a lot with the military. One of my colleagues had moved four times in two years. His DCs were, not unreasonably, a bit peed off with this. Boarding school gave them stability and a base.

Why not be more cross about those who work for international organisations who get their children's school fees, university fees (large chunk of) and their own private medical bills paid (even after they retire) who don't pay tax anywhere? Who pays their fees/bills? Why, the country they come from, if the country is a member of that international organisation. So that will be the tax payer, then.

my 11 yo is in her 7th school.
i also have two younger children.
i am loving all you lot who are daft enough to think that the continuity of education package is something to be envied.

we chose to keep our kids with us when we were schlepped around the world by the government. but my 3 kids are pretty resilient (despite having one with cerebral palsy and one as yet un-dx). i totally understand why parents sometimes opt for the harrowing experience of not seeing their own kids for months on end for the sake of them forming stable friendship groups and sticking to one curriculum. having spent many hours with friends in tears because their child has been sent to boarding school for the first time, i can assure you it ain't all partying and whooping about the fabulous perks of the job. it's more angst, pain and guilt and feeling utterly helpless from thousands of miles away.

and the ignorance on here about the military, is, as always, staggering.

Boarding school was a hoot.

And they're far and away better now than when i went.

i was ignoring nikon for good reason. my own 16 years in the military are clearly something that such small minded individuals are unable to comprehend. at least, not without starting the perennial mn discussion which centres around military personnel being unsuitable parents, and that they should not be allowed to breed. (largely because it costs the tax payers money, but with a great deal of angst about sep anxiety and child abandonment- there you go, i've done it for you. enjoy. i'm off to the real world where, thankfully, such nonsense is rare.)

And staff of international companies get this as well - school or boarding fees paid.

"People who kill for money don't get my sympathy" - so we should have rolled over and let Hitler come in, then?

Our son is hopefully going next year to a state boarding school where I expect the majority of the other boarders will be there on CEA and paying typically £900 a year instead of £9000 a year in boarding fees, due to a parent being in the armed forces. Our son will be boarding because his dad is posted abroad as a UK civil servant and unfortunately gets no fees paid at all, so we will be paying the full fees, but it's barely affordable on a below 40% tax payer and only 1 child thankfully. Do I feel the armed forces children should pay full fees too? Absolutely no way at all. Dh might be a UK crown employee, but he doesn't risk his life in quite the same way for his country. The least we could do for armed forces families is give them a bit of stability and keep their children at the same schools, the only way their parents could afford this on the average Armed Services salaries is to subsidise the boarding fees.

madwoman - it's pick on forces month on MN, last month it was pick on people with chilcren with disabiliteis, or pick on unemployed people, or pick on SAHM, or pick on WOHM.

I don't get offended or outraged on MN very often but to see someone actually type -Sorry, but people who kill for money don't have my sympathy! - has really offended me and angered me