AIBU to think that parents should buy the correct uniform and stop moaning

[Loveluck7]

I am getting increasingly irritated by people on FB moaning that their child's human rights have been violated because they were put into isolation for having the wrong uniform.

I understand that some rules can seem ridiculous but unfortunately some bad parents who have let their child wear spray on trousers and tiny skirts, have necessitated schools stipulating the exact items they need to wear.

Isolation does seem a harsh punishment when it is the parent's fault but how else can schools enforce the rules when some parent's think rules do not apply to them? The child cannot attend class without trousers and parent's would be angry if the child was sent home.

You also often find that it is these parent's who also complain when a school is no good at discipline, yet will not follow the rules themselves.

Multiply 16 by 3 (min 3 pairs needed ) and add it to a 35 quid blazer again need at least 2 or three that's over 150 quid right there and the poor sod hasn't even got pe, kit, bag,shoes, stationary, shirts, socks or had a hair cut yet.

Adds up and it's a sodding joke I wouldn't spend 16 quid on one skirt or pair of trousers for a growing child...bollocks

I think most schools with uniform operate a second hand uniform shop nowadays and if they don't, then suggest contacting the PTA and offering to help set one up (giving reasons of equality, economy, environment etc). Our school has one and it has been so successful that we now arrange second hand sales of non uniform children's clothes and toys every term, the proceeds of which part go to school funds and part go to charity.

£16 is not mid-range to some people, which is the point in trying to make.

I'm all for a standard uniform; it's the prohibitive cost that pissed me off!

*Multiply 16 by 3 (min 3 pairs needed ) and add it to a 35 quid blazer again need at least 2 or three that's over 150 quid right there and the poor sod hasn't even got pe, kit, bag,shoes, stationary, shirts, socks or had a hair cut yet.

Adds up and it's a sodding joke I wouldn't spend 16 quid on one skirt or pair of trousers for a growing child...bollocks*

This. Whilst it's not a great expense to some, it is to others of us out there!

This is an age where kids grow rapidly in some cases.

Gileswithachainsaw

We are on the same page.

I have no issue with uniform in principle. I have massive issues with how uniform is going of late when schools academize and go for ridiculously over logoed, restricted single supplier deals or such obscure colours they're essentially single supplier deals to try to cut out the poorer parents and feed the head's own ego. It used to be when I was in schools and they were changing over uniform (a lot of infants and juniors in our area merged into primaries and changed badges for that reason for example) they had a decent transition period of a year or so - but now it seems to be completely "you WILL wear this blazer with wanky green trim and a sweater in pantone colour 302432523 available from Pricey McPricePants in September or you're in isolation until you do"

YY.

Far too much of this about, and the poster upthread who said it's almost like a fetish with some heads had a point. I know of one or two who've headed a couple of different academies and pulled this shit in each.

You were saying it in a context thst you didn't believe it to be expensive.

Most of the people who state they cannot afford uniform when it has to be purchased from a designated supplier (which avoids uniform problems) seem able to afford all the other essentials in life...iphones blah blah

I mean it isn't as if the uniform will be worn for the best part of the whole year is it!

The job of schools is academics not fashion.

Uniforms are a waste of time and money. Few schools or families have the time or money for this conformist nonsense.

It's an outdated tradition. I wish schools would focus on teaching.

£16 per pair x two pairs = £32. Multiply by multiple children, at one point I'll have four in school at once, and for a lot of people - especially those on low incomes - the price starts to become too high. It would be £128 on trousers alone if that was my DC with two pairs each.

Some schools seem to go too far with uniform. One near us have a list of shoes FFS, you can only have one of the listed pairs. They cost between £18 and £45 from Wyndsors shoes. So far this year they've put 150 pupils in isolation for having shoes similar to those on the list but not the exact list shoes. I'm very glad my DS won't be going to that school as the only shoes he doesn't manage to destroy are a very specific pair of Startrites, he'd be in isolation for wearing them despite therm being smart, black school shoes. This sort of micro managing is why people have very little respect for uniform rules because some schools feel like "smart black shoes, no heels" isn't enough, they need to dictate brand, style, and the shop they can be bought from.

And it being mid-range in the general pricing range of what some schools charge to what others charge does NOT make it any more affordable!

Whilst there are, undoubtedly, cheaper and more expensive options, my point is that the option I have is not affordable and is not cheap for me to afford. THAT is my point.

For something to he mid range surely people have to actually be able to buy from a range? You know, try on different styles and find your happy medium between cost quality and fit and all that shit

When said item is stipulated and only available from one supplier it is not "mid" anything. It's a rip off.

If you don't believe it to be expensive for the majority of people, then you must live in a note affluent area than I.

Factually speaking, again, it is not affordable for a lot of people.

Mid range in price does not equal affordability.

There is one option available to me.

£16.

My daughter goes to a school that is considered outstanding and the enforcement of the school uniform policy is ridiculous. You can't take them out of school if they have a medical appointment but you can stick them in a room on their own because they're wearing the wrong colour hair bobble. I hate seeing them in such formal clothes

Every time this thread comes up it makes me feel like pointing out that if the vast majority of a school actually followed the damn uniform in the first place then they wouldn't go down the route of single supplier.

Put it this way. My school doesn't do single supplier other than the blazer. Skirt is single supplier but is optional. Since we've been back I've had 3 uniform issues. I had to tell 2 students to tuck their shirt in and 1 to roll her skirt to a bettwr length. That's it.
That means I've spent my time doing all sorts of useful stuff and not dealing with silly discussions with students / parents with the following predictably stupid ideas:
But the shop said these trainers were shoes abd they were in the school section
You're body shaming girls by expecting them to cover their bums in a skirt
When are they ever going to need a uniform in life. I think you just enjoy having a go at kids
It's not like 'insert banned item' affects their learning
I can't belive they're in isolation for ONLY...

Schools have rules. Follow them.

I guess it is about priorities - uniform that will last the best part of the school year or something else. If you have school uniform that the child needs less other clothing - they have to wear something else if uniform isn't stipulated then you get the look what I can afford problems ...

There appears to be a lot of people not very good at budgeting or spending money/throwing it away on other things iPhones smoking drinking nails tats the list goes on and of course all of this much more important than uniform.

"Angry People In Local Newspapers" features lots of these stories each year, under the tag "Home you go".

Here's the first roundup of the season.

Wrt discussion about mid range, I wonder if there might be a mean vs median thing going on here? As in, there might an equal number of brands charging more than £16 and less than £16, but more people are buying from the cheaper than the more expensive ranges? So people are working with different definitions of average?

Although personally I don't think that's a good way to assess costs anyway. The reality is that £16 for a pair of trousers, when most children are going to need at least two, is going to cause financial hardship to some families. The appropriate figure to aim for would be something that those in the lower half can easily afford. And fair point about there not being able to be a mid range when you only have one choice!

Why should we follow ridiculous outdated rules, an awful lot of people cannot afford silly logoed jumpers and why make parents life difficult?

Every time this thread comes up it makes me feel like pointing out that if the vast majority of a school actually followed the damn uniform in the first place then they wouldn't go down the route of single supplier.

This just isn't true, though.

There are plenty of us who can provide examples of schools where they didn't have a problem with uniform compliance but decided to do it anyway.