school shoes aibu (prepared to be told I am)

[frangipan]

My son started secondary school this year, in line with the uniform policy which states ' black, preferably leather, shoes with non slip soles' I bought him these
www.amazon.co.uk/Pod-Felix-Older-Casual-School/dp/B00E4NIFBU/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1384879250&sr=8-3&keywords=pod+boys+shoes so far so good, uniform was checked and passed off in the first week.

They fell apart after the first half term, walking, bus ride, heavy rain etc. The soles peeled away and the facing came away. We did glue them together so they would make it to half term.

so in half term we bought some more expensive better quality shoes

www.amazon.co.uk/Vans-Black-Leather-Trainers-UK/dp/B006EIU2YG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1384879462&sr=8-2&keywords=black+leather+vans

we used permanent marker and blacked out the logo flash. They are black leather shoes with non slip soles. They have told us the new pair are not acceptable and that we have a week to buy new ones and that the original one were not suitable. We argued that our DS (if I do say so myself) is always clean and smart looking and that the shoes are in accordance with uniform policy. The school still say they are not appropriate. I honestly didn't buy them for the brand and bought them on the premise that they were similar to the original pair that no one had commented on for eight weeks.DS has canvas versions for casual wear and I knew they would fit and be comfortable. Can they really force us to buy more shoes by punishing DS??? new to all this so all help much appreciated.

The school sent him into isolation this morning for uniform breach. No one contacted me.

This is why our education system is so poor now a days too many Heads of school are more concerend about Uniform rather than making sure the education is at least adequate.

these are school shoes for young men at school

Sorry OP, yours are trainers.

I can't believe what children wear on their feet has any effect on their education.
My kids are in primary and wear black plimsolls in class and can have whichever outdoor shoes they like, since they are only worn in the playground.

I am dreading secondary school when their education has to take a back seat to how they are dressed .

How will that help them in the world of work? Wear the right clothes and you'll be ok, the quality of your work won't be an issue. It is the wrong message to give to kids that only appearances matter.

They are very obviously trainers to me - no separate heel, sole too thick.

So they are sticking to their uniform policy.

Disagree with it, fine (I do too) but they make the rule and sending your kid to the school means you have to follow them.

They look like black shoes to me! Would they not be Ok for a wedding? I honestly can't see why.

I think they are black leather shoes and that was all the uniform policy asked. I certainly don't think your DS should have been put in isolation for this as clearly he was trying to comply with the policy. I think it would be fairer for the school to ask you to get a different type of shoe in future but to let your DS wear the current ones until they wear out / are grown out of. They should also tighten up their uniform policy if they are unhappy to make it clearer to parents what is allowed.

Agree can't school uniform generally isn't smart dress. I wasn't talking about school clothes, more specifically what constitutes smart shoes.

Yes kickers can be ugly (some of them) but they'd look smarter when polished and worn with decent trousers/shirt than plimsoll type shoes would.

A lot of people seem to be siding with the school purely on the basis that that Amazon link describes them as trainers.

If you google the model number, they come up on different websites with lots of different descriptions, including 'vulcanised black leather shoes'

If OP had posted that link, would you still be saying she IU?

(YANBU, OP.)

DumbBambooI did not say I bought them via the link, that was for illustration purposes, I also didn't say I paid that much for either pair. The first pair were £22.00 from brantano. And I didn't pay that much for the second pair either. I also did not say that more expensive=ok for school! I said better quality (I thought)=last longer. I was thinking along the lines of false economy. It was not a deliberate attempt to bend or break school rules, and the school have acknowledged this in the eamail stating that they had been bought in good faith on the basis that the original pair had been ok'd.

Squirted

Slip-ons make me feel a bit queasy

LittleBairn - disagree. Schools have always cracked down on uniform and had rules and sanctions when not followed. Nothing to do with declining education at all. I was at school in the 80s - it ws no different to now re uniform; lkiewise my mum was at school in the 60s - again still uniform rules to conform with.

We need some sort of Venn diagram or perhaps Classification system like the one for the Animal Kingdom that defines these labels.

" Wear the right clothes and you'll be ok, the quality of your work won't be an issue. "

Since when was that the attitude in schools? Certainly not in any school I ave worked in.

Frang I never mentioned the cost at all, you did. I just suggested some reasonable shoes on ebay and then you launched into one. I responded accordingly. Not sure why you are so offended by that.

I also never said you were breaking school rules!

I do find your responses bizarre rather amusing actually. Your wonderfully puerile name-calling is so original there, there dear

YANBU
It is time the nations parents and children refused to take any sanction imposed over school shoes, for cause an insane amount of stress.

Seriously if school said a word over either of those I would write to the HT telling them to either take a running jump or drive my child into town and buy him some shoes with his/her own money!

I would also question intimating that other people are dumb, when by your own admission you buy what you know your son wears as casual shoes thinking they'll be ok for school!

DS would never keep those slip on shoes on. super wide feet,Tiny legs and ankles (think golf clubs) we did try on every type of shoe in brantano, tried clarkes also. So I wasn't trying to hedge my bets. Thanks all for replying. Will link to new shoes for approval later

sparechange - not basing my comment on Amazon des cription. I have seen many a pair of Vans - most, ad I think this black pair included, are trainer/pumps more than proper shoes. Some of their styles are more proper shoe like - but I don't think these ones are particularly.

Given that the first pair were approved I can't see any reason for the second pair being unacceptable.

I would be tempted, if DS was up for it, to buy some leather winkle pickers or even 'shock horror' some girls shoes just to demonstrate the twatiness of the rules...

someone needs a lie down, bless ya

and I didn't say you were dumb my little lollipop x

Yes, off 'ya' go.

I went to school seniour school in the early 80's we were allowed, black, blue, brown, grey shoes and the world didn't end.

I've been to sixth form in high heels because my court shoes were being mended (again). Did any one ring my mum, of course not. My mum politely, but very firmly would have told The HT where to go.

My rural area had little money, no shops and most mums didn't have cars during the day. No one was sent home ill, so certainly no one was sent home for uniform.

They're trainers not shoes. Why did you buy trainers in the first place if the policy is shoes?!