To think schools shouldn't be making an income from uniforms

[Mountaingoatling]

I buy my nephew and my niece their school uniform. I pay for it and take them Back to School shopping. They are 9 and 7.

I have found out that for each item I buy (we have to shop at their official supplier), the school receives 50p per item. It's £1 for a blazer.

One part of me thinks, this only means me contributing to the school about £25 a year. It's a state school.

Another part thinks this is really dodgy! The school aren't upfront about it and the official supplier is expensive. Not all parents can afford this (the reason I buy school uniform is my brother and SIL can't easily afford it).

Is this the normal??

YABU - it is normal and not a big deal; schools need the money

YANBU - parents shouldn't have to subsidise the school unless they want to voluntarily and these deals don't help parents

People say that schools need the money but there is really no need for these nonsensically expensive (and complicated) uniforms. I am not against school uniforms in principle, but there's no need for ties or expensive blazers etc.

Just say something like grey trousers, navy jumper/cardigan and white/blue blouse/shirt. A school PE kit can be nice, they are more expensive but I found my son's washed really well and it looked good so I'd potentially make an exception there.

And stop worrying about heel size and skirt length and let teachers teach instead of policing uniform.

Expensive school uniform should be banned for state schools, but although governments issue guidance, none of them ever have the nerve to actually say that you should be able to buy all elements at a supermarket.

It has influenced the decision about which secondary school we want DS to go to.

School A wants everything to come from the school supplier with various uniforms needed for each type of sport, technical lessons, basic uniform. All logo'd and vv expensive. School shoes must be black, leather and plain.

School b- all supermarket uniform acceptable apart from blazer, where you can buy one and sew a badge on. Shoes can be black trainers.

Both schools are excellent according to local reputation and ofsted.

Whilst DS goes through puberty, I cannot see how we could afford to pay for the obscene uniform requirements of school A.

@Justgettingbye

I've got the whole uniform shebang soon as my dd is starting school. I see various items in Asda and think they're good value but have no idea if you can mix or match or if everything needs to be bought from the supplier 🤷🏼‍♀️

Technically you should be able to mix and match anything that doesn’t have a logo on, such as shirts and skirts. Unfortunately a lot of schools get around this by insisting on an unusual uniform. In my dd’s all girls school they need sky blue blouses and knee length navy skirts with one large pleat at the front. No supermarkets sell that so everyone has to buy from the school supplier.

And stop worrying about heel size and skirt length and let teachers teach instead of policing uniform.

that has nothing to do with uniform. Most non-uniform schools still have rules and guidelines about what is acceptable. It's a shame they have to, but there you go.

It is complex at the school they are...uniform changes with different year groups and things go out of stock leaving me rather confused when we aren't allowed to buy alternatives. Some items don't last, so I buy multiples. Others they seem to outgrow before items have been worn. I don't object to a uniform but I had not realised how complicated things had got!

It has influenced the decision about which secondary school we want DS to go to.

Precisely. That’s one reason some schools do it. Having a fancy, complicated and expensive uniform that changes between years etc weeds out a lot of families who can’t afford it, chaotic families, children with special needs that cannot tolerate eg ties… and attracts a certain type of parent that values “smartness” and “discipline”. It’s a form of selection by stealth.

can you blame parents for preferring a school with a more or less smart uniforms, as opposed to a place with kids slobbing around in football kit or hot pants?

can you blame parents for preferring a school with others happy to contribute financially to their kids education, uniform included, than schools where the majority doesn't bother?

Fundings being roughly the same, a school where parents contribute financially a lot more will have better facilities, resources and opportunities. That's life.

There are quite a few uniform suppliers, getting a school on board to only sell the uniform through their shop is a big deal - therefore they would offer incentives. Yours seems to be money back.

You aren’t subsiding them unless the price has risen. The official supplier is in effect paying them commission or a percentage of each item in order to have the school custom

Most schools have secondhand uniform shops or sales because often things are worn once a week for six months then outgrown.y children's school does have fairly expensive uniform (though a darn sight cheaper than some of the schools near us) but the school shop sells PE kit for 50p a pop, DD even got a hockey top for free last year (she left hers at a.match but the leavers gear was offered to the teams before going into the shop because team members use their kit more, so it matters that it fits)

I do think uniform is cheaper than own clothes (having seen how awful non-uniform day competitiveness gets, and personally always dreading/hating non-uniform day when I was in school) but I think all schools (well, state schools, obviously) should have the same colour trousers/skirts/shirts/jumpers as they do in other countries such as Japan, so that anyone can buy uniform from any shop, just ties, and maybe a sew-on school badge to differentiate. All PE kits should be universal too.
If everyone is the same, bullying for clothing is minimised, and the choice parents make (uniform from Asda or from JL) is according to their budget.

It's still bent though.

I think all school uniforms should be available from the supermarkets and then parents just buy a badge from the school.

However, I only posted to say what a lovely, caring and thoughtful aunt you are!!!!!

@khakiandcoral

can you blame parents for preferring a school with a more or less smart uniforms, as opposed to a place with kids slobbing around in football kit or hot pants?

can you blame parents for preferring a school with others happy to contribute financially to their kids education, uniform included, than schools where the majority doesn't bother?

Fundings being roughly the same, a school where parents contribute financially a lot more will have better facilities, resources and opportunities. That's life.

But this just perpetuates inequalities. Why should children from families lower down the socio-economic scale be penalised for something that is no fault of their own? Their position on that socioeconomic scale will be cemented and passed on to their children by having to attend poorly-performing schools. This is what has happened since the 70s when the assisted places scheme was abolished.

Children living in poverty should be sent to the best schools, so they can end that cycle.

Children living in poverty should be sent to the best schools, so they can end that cycle.

and children with parents doing well should be penalised

At some point, people need to take responsibility. It would be a horrible system if parents could just have kids they can't afford but knowing that others would have to pick up the cost !

There's equal access to free education as it is, it's more than fair.

You can disagree with grammar schools who are basically reserved to the ones who bother paying for private tutoring and extra schooling, but there's no real way around that is it. Parents who care will always go the extra mile, and it actually has very little to do with income. Some very disadvantaged families sacrifice everything to give a decent education.

@khakiandcoral

Children living in poverty should be sent to the best schools, so they can end that cycle.

and children with parents doing well should be penalised

At some point, people need to take responsibility. It would be a horrible system if parents could just have kids they can't afford but knowing that others would have to pick up the cost !

There's equal access to free education as it is, it's more than fair.

You can disagree with grammar schools who are basically reserved to the ones who bother paying for private tutoring and extra schooling, but there's no real way around that is it. Parents who care will always go the extra mile, and it actually has very little to do with income. Some very disadvantaged families sacrifice everything to give a decent education.

There may be equal access to free education, but there’s not equal access to free education of equal quality.

Why on earth should children be punished with poorer education beside their parents can’t afford £200/£300 for a uniform?

State schools should not be inaccessible because of the cost of uniform.

@Eeyoresstickhouse that's so nice! I feel totally out of touch the entire time...and my niece did tell her mum I was the boring aunt as I only bought them uniform, clothes and books!! But I'm probably better at that than even beginning to understand the world of toys and computer games

My children are still at primary so the uniform is really cheap. Only logo item needed is the jumpers, and I've bought some second hand. Yes you can buy a whole range of polos, bags, coats etc from the school supplier but they aren't required. Definitely cheaper than their home clothes.

If they are 9 and 7 and wearing a blazer then it sounds like a private school, in which case yes, you will pay an eye watering amount for uniform, but that helps weed out the poor people so is just to be expected.

There's equal access to free education as it is, it's more than fair.

Really, @khakiandcoral? Then how does that correlate with your statement that children with parents doing well should be penalised? They wouldn't be penalised if access to education was equal, would they?

You know full well it is not.

@RedAndGreenPlaid

There's equal access to free education as it is, it's more than fair.

Really, @khakiandcoral? Then how does that correlate with your statement that children with parents doing well should be penalised? They wouldn't be penalised if access to education was equal, would they?

You know full well it is not.

did you read the post I am replying to? If you keep it in context, my reply actually makes sense. The poster wanted to reserve the best schools for the poorest . Hardly an equal or fair system then, would it.

There IS equal access to free education!

The difference is the extra parents are willing to pay for. (which they shouldn't have to, we agree, but there's no funding).

When parents start paying the teacher's salaries etc.. it's called a private school. That's not what we are talking about now.

There is no way equal access to education. Why are house prices thousands of pounds more in an "outstanding" school catchment? This makes one way children don't have equal access. School uniform if it is all from the school supplier then lower income families cannot afford it, another way why equal access is not granted.

I think it should be grey/black trousers for all school available from most places. Black/Grey/Blue jumper available from anywhere and if required a sew on/iron on badge can be purchased for the jumper. A blazer that could be bought from anywhere again with a badge bought. White shirt/polo shirt etc...

Schools near us have kilts, pin strip skirts and blouses so you cannot buy then from anywhere but the school supplier. Not on and very exclusionary for lower income families. When my eldest started secondary it cost me over £500 to kit her out. That is not a viable amount if you are living hand to mouth. It may be your local catchment school but you still can't afford to send then at that price.

I WROTE the post you're replying to! of course I fucking read it.

There is no way equal access to education. Why are house prices thousands of pounds more in an "outstanding" school catchment?

you can't blame people for settling in the best area they can afford, so obviously the school population will reflect your community.

It's still an equal access, any child in this country has the same right to a place in school, offering the same curriculum, the same exams, with state paid teachers...

There's no requirement for even a small fee, no requirement to buy any supplies even.

You can't make the school system in this country any more "free" and equal than it is!

*can you blame parents for preferring a school with a more or less smart uniforms, as opposed to a place with kids slobbing around in football kit or hot pants?

can you blame parents for preferring a school with others happy to contribute financially to their kids education, uniform included, than schools where the majority doesn't bother?

Fundings being roughly the same, a school where parents contribute financially a lot more will have better facilities, resources and opportunities. That's life.*

I’m not blaming parents, though I think your reference to hot pants is ridiculous- there’s a middle road of a moderately priced uniform. The sharp elbowed middle classes will always seek advantage for their children, it’s natural and I do so myself. But state funded schools shouldn’t be allowed to pander to those parents and wiggle out of being inclusive and diverse by setting up artificial barriers like expensive uniforms to deter particular demographics attending.

@RedAndGreenPlaid

I WROTE the post you're replying to! of course I fucking read it.

then why did you twist my reply?

Deadleaf29

though I think your reference to hot pants is ridiculous-

Why? You think a non-uniform school doesn't have a dress code? You've never seen a teen girl in a pair of shorts?

Fine, but not at school...

Why? You think a non-uniform school doesn't have a dress code? You've never seen a teen girl in a pair of shorts?

I’m objecting to overpriced, very specific and logoed uniform being used as a social filter for schools. To suggest the only alternative to a uniform of blazer, tie and logo everything is to allow football kits and hot pants is absurd. Plenty of perfectly good schools have a moderately priced uniform, mostly plain and available in a variety of shops. I object to a school saying a child needs a pair of grey trousers with a tiny embroidered logo at three times the cost of a plain grey pair from M&S - I’m not suggesting doing away with school uniform and allowing hot pants.