AIBU to object to school asking parents to cover trip shortfall?

[BingoBongoBusted]

So, I coughed up the required £23 for my child to go the school's "celebration day" for all year 5 and 6 children.
They have now said there is a shortfall, as not everyone had paid, and another £182.50 is required for the trip to happen, asking if any parents would like to pay more.
Pupil Premium families get half paid anyway, so those of us that have already paid in full are essentially being asked if we'd like to pay a bit more to fund the freeloaders who haven't paid.
AIBU to think this is outrageous???
I get that it's a trip in the school day,contributions have to be voluntary and unlike residentials either everyone goes or it doesn't happen, irrespective of who has/hasn't paid, but I thought charging extra to cover the non-payers wasn't allowed, which is what this very much feels like.

No child should ever suffer because of their parents lack of means/preparation/inclination. She was a child. Your post is tone deaf and rude.

Not really having a pop at you. More your school. Trips are about enrichment and broadening experiences - they are very popular which is why school run them.

But I do fundamentally disagree that school should treat children equally. They should stretch and develop every child to their full potential with the resources they have. Other even things like homework are unfair - some kids will be getting help with their Maths from someone with a PHD in maths other from someone who failed themselves. Of course poor kids have lots of disadvantages but the non-poor kids shouldn't then be held back to stop people feelings getting hurt.

There's a lot of judgement here on what people can and can't afford. My children on the face of things have lots, however my husband was made redundant and we received no help from the state so had to tighten our belts. You have no idea what goes on behind closed doors.

There is some real judgement and nastiness on this thread... being poor isn't something to be ashamed of.

If the costs of the coach were split 50 ways and now only 40 are going it will cost more per head...

Either way pay or don't pay its voluntary. I would happily pay more if it meant a child wasn't excluded from something but recognise my privilege of being able to do so.

Exactly. Their lives are very hard with children, and making those children sit in a different class Al lday doing worksheets whilst their more affluent friends have a special day, is crap.

We do a Christmas fair and a Summer fair, plus £5 per child for out of uniform. I'm sure it doesn't go far, we're only a single form entry Primary, but it helps stuff like this.

Pupil Premium families get half paid anyway, so those of us that have already paid in full are essentially being asked if we'd like to pay a bit more to fund the freeloaders who haven't paid

Aren't you a fucking delight?

Don't pay, let the trip get cancelled?

Schools can't win.

Our Y3 class trip this year was on site. They had a forest school coordinator come in to do loads of activities and use the wooded area they have in the grounds. It was kept as cheap as possible, £6.92 per person. One of DD's friend's parents deliberately didn't pay because it wasn't a "proper" trip. She said she would have happily paid £25 for them to go on a trip elsewhere but wouldn't pay a penny to a day on site.

School sent a message saying they had tried to keep costs as low as possible but what they had received hadn't received enough to cover the cost of the coordinator and class teacher was personally out of pocket.

I paid another £25 voluntarily because it isn't the school or teacher's fault someone else was throwing their toys out of the pram about it not being expensive enough for them to consider paying for it!

@sunsettosunrise I understand your point, but why is it my problem to pay for other people's kids?

Life isn't fair unfortunately, there will always be people who can afford more than you, and less than you. I can't afford holidays abroad, drive an 18 yesr old car and live in a 2 bed flat, but in return DD has 2 horses.

I think it's a shame that poorer children have to miss out, but it isn't fair to ask better off parents to pay either.

Is it better for some to go, and some to miss out - or EVERYONE to miss out? I'm not sure on the answer to that one

I think this is going to become more and more of an issue. Cost of living is reducing discretionary spend and coach costs are high. I’d like the rules to change so schools have a a bit more flexibility in what they can charge and could build up a buffer. It would make sense for a school to be able to round up a £21 trip to £25 for example.

For our school, one year they had a real problem with the residential trip. They can get grant funding for the most deprived kids so that isn’t the factor. The issue is people who perhaps are making a choice not to pay but still go on the trip. For these residentials there should be an opt out. It is too much for the school to absorb thousands of pounds of non payers.

I also think with budgets as they are, schools may be forced to ask for parental contributions (again currently against the rules).

Why do people care if some of their donation goes towards paying for a child where the parent can actually afford to pay?

If I donate £20 and only 50% of that goes towards paying for someone genuinely in need then it will be money well spent. I decided at the outset that I could more than afford £20.

Just the same as if I give a homeless person on the street £10 and they spend £8 on tobacco and £2 on a sandwich. I’ve tried to help in a little way and I can afford the £10 so it doesn’t matter to me how it is spent.

I would much rather teach my children about charity, looking after each other, helping when we are able etc than have an “as long as I’m alright mate” attitude.

No, that's your life.
Lots of people work hard to bridge the inequality or wealth as it affects children. Lots of organisations provide opportunities for low income families so that their kdis get to experience the same as wealthier children. Lots of schools put a lot of work and energy into lifting kids up not bringing their expectations down.

That was my bugbear when kids were small. I didn't have much money but I was just above the eligibility to get FSM and subsided trips.

So in reality I had less to spend on trips as I had to pay for school dinners than the now" PP kids" parents

It wouldn't be fair to MAKE people pay extra, but it's weird to think they can't ask. Plenty on here have cleay said they'd be happy to pay because they don't want kids to miss out. You wouldn't pay because you're happy for kids to miss out. That's fine too. Refusing to ask for help and just cancelling the trip doesn't help your kid either.

The school should cover this

Fair enough if it's trips that a parent doesn't have the time, confidence or wherewithal to organise themselves - or indeed just can't be bothered; but that still doesn't magically make them able to afford them, just because school is organising it.

I suppose it might make a difference if they're on PP and/or they can have a (possibly uncomfortable for them) chat with the school and agree to pay much less; but even then, that still ends up being subsidised by both the parents of the kids from wealthy homes AND the ones who can just about manage it, but will have to make sacrifices to do so - possibly erven including the family day-trips out that they may have been planning over the summer holidays, in the absence of being able to afford a 'proper' family holiday in the first place.

I do realise that the trips are voluntary, but the kids will talk about them excitedly. It will be impossible for the poorer kids to not know about them - and not being able to go with their friends will be upsetting, make them feel inferior/less deserving and could even lead to bullying.

It's ironic that one commonly-cited reason for school uniforms is to ease pressure on kids from poorer homes, so they won't be bullied for not wearing the expensive brands; yet a £1,000 holiday is excitedly planned and announced by the school and then it's like painting a target on the back of the kids whose parents have no option but to say No.

This is an excellent support plan. I'm going to suggest this to our parents group.

How crazy my A friend of mine and her husband adopted their children. He is an EXTREMELY high earlier ( like above 200k) and she is a higher rate tacpayer also. Why would her kids be eligible for funding simply because they were adopted

I’m really saddened by some of the posts on here.

What is the actual impact for the people who can afford an extra £5/£10/£20? Pretty much nothing. I mean people who can easily spend £15 on a cocktail or £5 on a coffee. Lucky people. Like me at this particular moment. £20 will not affect my monthly budget. £100 would so that’s where it gets trickier, but there is absolutely no change in my lifestyle if I pay £18 for a cinema trip so my son’s mate can come or £9 for just him.

For millions of people that’s not true. There’s a massive difference between £5/£10/£20. And the impact on their children who need to miss a trip with their friends is huge. Kids remember this and it will affect them later. So when I weigh up my own priorities, it’s easy for me to pay double when I can to avoid some little kid being heartbroken and ‘othered’.

Our school has children from all sorts of backgrounds. But at school they should have the same opportunities and the same experiences. Outside of school sure - some have their own bedrooms or their own pony or skiing holidays or whatever. Some are spending their weekend at food banks and refugee centres. But once they are in the school building they should be less aware of their differences.

I didn’t grow up with money - my parents counted every penny and we never went on holiday or to a restaurant. I am sure there were months they had to juggle. I am very, very lucky to so far be able to provide something different for my kids but I know it’s just one disaster from that being my life again. People who can’t have empathy for struggling children could at least try to have sympathy.

We aren’t talking about the same thing. In my previous message I addressed the lack of affordability, but in the above message I was addressing this idea that schools these days are celebrating/going on trips for any old thing, I was defending these trips from a perspective that I believe they are enriching for children and potentially give them opportunities they may not otherwise have. My children’s school fundraiser throughout the year for trips, and if kids couldn’t afford to go the trip wouldn’t go ahead, usually under the guise of ‘not enough staff’ or related. No trips should go ahead, in my opinion, if it means a child with financial difficulties cannot go. I am also aware that my school is fortunate enough to have parents who donate to and participate in the fundraising, schools in poorer areas wouldn’t have that choice. And maybe that’s why when I was at school we only did two trips. But even one of those trips was enough for me.

I really don’t think it’s crazy at all. There are lots of challenges that adopted children often face after a hard start even if they are adopted into affluent households. I really couldn’t begrudge funding going towards adopted children at all and it probably isn’t always claimed.

It's a bit frightening that they couldn't have said "If you would like your child to attend, this is the required fee".

It's supposed to be a school, and this seems so simple that it wouldn't even qualify for a T1 class' 5 minute worksheet.

No way in hell should you pay for the difference, and frankly, I'd make this stance well and truly heard - among both parents and staff. For whatever the reason, whether their children don't want to go, or they don't want to pay, it's not your mess to clean up.

Every time I've looked back at all the trips etc. at my schools, I've been increasingly glad that I never wanted to go on any of them. Jesus Christ, I dread to think of the cost of them...

I'm not sure the kids had that much of a " hard start" either. She had them both from around 3 months and neither have any SEN. Not like adopting a kid who has been shunted through the care system and back and forth with failed attempts to keep with birth family

It's a bit frightening that they couldn't have said "If you would like your child to attend, this is the required fee".

It's supposed to be a school, and this seems so simple that it wouldn't even qualify for a T1 class' 5 minute worksheet.
What basic maths is that allows for a crystal ball to determine in advance how many parents can't/won't pay and what impact that then has on venue hire/coach hire etc being split between fewer people?

Schools aren't allowed tin case parents feelings get hurt.

With many of these trips by the time you pay for a coach and the increased costs for the freeloaders it would be cheaper just to take your child's yourself.

It's really not the hard up parents that dont pay though, it's always the entitled ones who chose not to. At DCS' school it's the less well off kids that always have the correct uniform that fits well etc, the parents pay their first penny towards their children before thinking of buying anything for themselves.