To not get schools issue with dyed hair?

[fitforflighting]

I suspect I may get flamed for this but I genuinely do not get it.
They have a rule against earrings including sleepers. That I get especially with younger children or in sports were children can end up getting them at worst ripped out.

I can kind of even get extreme haircuts with big shaved stars or strange styles that look unprofessional and might not be allowed by adults in a professional work place.

But this week and last term several of senior age children who had dyed hair brown/red/dark purple etc were sent home from school to re dye or put in isolation by teachers with errr brown/red/purple dyed hair! One of the children's teacher has bright purple hair. It does not make her any less of a English teacher or lesson her professionalism in school I don't reckon so what is the problem for teens?

"Brightside I suggest you homeschool"

No chance. I have a job and I pay tax. Why shouldn't my child get a proper education?

Depends where you work. Seen any pink haired BA stewardesses?

Workplace rules are made very clear and steps are taken if there is persistent non-compliance. Not to mention that you are then relying on the ex employer for a reference...

"Brightside, you're very confident about what is legal in schools when you haven't yet had any contact with schools as a parent yourself. Unless you're a teacher of course?"

It's just basic common sense. Am I wrong? Are schools allowed in law to refuse to teach based on a pupil's hair colour?

LordBrightside

At 2.5 you have plenty of time to source the type of school that suits what you want for your son, whether it is Steiner, Free, or Home Ed etc.

But I suspect that you will choose a school based solely on results, and will make a pain of yourself when you do not approve of the sanctions that the school puts in place.

Also, when you sign up to a school, you sign a contract agreeing to follow the rules

Just on a point of information - no, you don't, at least insofar as maintained and academy schools are concerned. It isn't a contract.

Don't worry, LordBrightside, HSAs are not legally binding. On the school's part either. They are an intention, a way of clarifying the expectations of the school to parents.

You really really should think of homeschooling.

"Depends where you work. Seen any pink haired BA stewardesses?"

Link me to where a BA flight crew member has been sacked for dying their hair.

Ah you have a 2.5 year old and you're debating teenagers, yeah lets see what your opinions are inea 12 years, and what you will agree to in order for your child to get into the right school.

Anyway back to uniform, I agree its a bit extreme for hair colour, but you signed up to the school rules, learning to follow rules is good for kids because it prepares them for life. I've taught many children who are shocked when you tell them they can't get their own way ( in very differing economic circumstances) and they benefit from having boundaries set. As a parent it is your responsibility that you back the school in the setting of boundaries, which for whatever reason have been set for the benefit of the entire community.

In one way I can understand hair colour, because it can become a deflectio issue, you ask a child to take out their piercing and they spend hours shouting about why xyz is allowed blue hair but they're not allowed a piercing, making people conform to a standard lowers distruption as far as I can see.

I completely disagree with anything above health and safety and a colour for uniform and a jumper. Uniforms are expensive enough without having to have special jumpers and blazers etc etc.

Unless you work somewhere that has a uniform asides from looking smart there are often very few rules. I know teachers that have loads of tattoos (one who actually uses one as part of a history lesson as its regarding his grandfather in WW2), stretched ears, bright hair etc. I have friends with bright pink hair who work in local government, I have friend with dreadlocks who works as lecturer in a college.

Us "degenerates" with bright hair, tattoos and piercings are a valid part of society too and not allowing them in secondary schools teaches kids that its ok to reject those who do have them. Do I need to bring in the case of Sophie Lancaster and her being attacked by a group because she was a goth? Her mum is now going into schools and educating kids about tolerance of subcultures, how can this be done if schools reject kids changing either appearance to reflect who they are?

Sorry rant over!

GruntledOne
there is a very, very simple way round the problem of the child with pink tips being seen to break a rule by keeping her pink tips and getting away with it. And that is not to have such a stupid rule in the first place.

Or the parent could just say no.

Depends where you work. Seen any pink haired BA stewardesses?

Irrelevant. No-one has to become a BA stewardess, and they get paid for, amongst other matters, agreeing to wear uniform and accept uniform rules. All parents have to ensure their children are in full time education.

Are schools allowed in law to refuse to teach based on a pupil's hair colour?

If they are in school and undertaking an approved activity, then they are learning/being taught.

"But I suspect that you will choose a school based solely on results, and will make a pain of yourself when you do not approve of the sanctions that the school puts in place."

Correct.

I think that's the point Brightside. I want my children to have an education too, and not have it waylaid by silly people titting about with their rule breaking.

I didn't say it was legally binding, but I said you agreed to it.

If you/your child is a source of constant disruption then they will end up with the inevitable concequences and be transferred.

"If they are in school and undertaking an approved activity, then they are learning/being taught."

Isolation is not "being taught" to the same standard as their classmates and amounts to wilful discrimination and victimisation. If it is as a result of hair colour, that is indefensible.

In one way I can understand hair colour, because it can become a deflectio issue, you ask a child to take out their piercing and they spend hours shouting about why xyz is allowed blue hair but they're not allowed a piercing, making people conform to a standard lowers distruption as far as I can see.

But you can avoid that so easily by having no rules about hair colour. Then you can reasonably point out to the child with the piercing that xyz is allowed blue hair because it isn't against any rule, whereas you have a perfectly sensible safety-related rule about piercings.

The BA pink haired stewardesses have either been let go, reallocated to a desk job, or are compliant with the rules of that workplace. No I'm not running about the Internet for you.

"Ithink that's the point Brightside. I want my children to have an education too, and not have it waylaid by silly people titting about with their rule breaking."

Then no silly rules.

GruntledOne

All parents have to ensure their children are in full time education.

That doesn't mean that they have to attend a school.

Brightside - your child will get good education if you allow it and join in with the ethos of the school.
Sadly your attitude is reflective of a lot of what is wrong with education. I really hope your child never has any issues as you will be a nightmare to deal with.

Grundle - is that the Germany that comes only three places ahead of the UK in the Piza tests? With only .5 between them? And my 20 years of experience are with children of today - so not really comparable with centuries.
Oh and the Blazers are bought in bulk and are cheap to the parents. They are provided to those that can't afford and there are payment plans in place so parents can pay weekly. Everything else can be sourced anywhere. (Apart from the tie).

Gruntled, you may think like that, but believe me even with something that is reasonable some students will find issue and make it a point of argument.

I had an argument with a year 11 today who insisted that she be able to answer her phone mid lesson, would not have it any other way.

I did say myself I didn't agree with the hair rules, but I can see some logic in it.

If they are in school and undertaking an approved activity, then they are learning/being taught.

Not so. Schools have to teach the national curriculum. If a child is spending all day every day in school doing worksheets and never receiving any teaching, they would have an excellent judicial review claim against the school and, possibly, the local authority also.

I didn't say it was legally binding, but I said you agreed to it.

Look at the scenario where the child is allocated a school the parent doesn't want. Realistically if the parent cannot home educate she has no choice but to send her child to that school. What has she agreed to?

Academies don't have to teach the national curriculum nor employ qualified teachers.