Private schools can't read inflation figures

[roguedad]

Is anyone else getting notices of extortionate fee rises right now? I had been hoping for maybe 1-2% in the light of inflation being zero, but I have just had notices from a Oxfordshire junior and senior of about 5.9% and 6.7% from this year to next. Both letters laden with excuses of course, neither really acceptable.
Those not able to access private ed might well say "serves you right". We have already said that to ourselves so please, no posts stating the obvious.

topsy I personally don't require my DS to be 6% happier (wonders how you could measure this another thread perhaps) or get 6% more A*'s I would just them like to maintain the current ethos/approach. Parents are very fickle I suspect any change in approach brought about by either no increase in fees or even a reduction would have many running for the exit.
Voting for new building versus capping fees is an interesting idea but I suspect fraught with difficulties. Those parents with sporty children, half an eye on a US university or simply sports fanatics (yawn) would probably vote yes, those who love music and have musical children and if like me couldn't name a single premier league football club if their life depended on it they would probably vote no. On the other hand if they were being asked to vote for a new music dept then the opposite might occur. I suspect it's best to leave these decisions to governors at the end of the day. You have to trust your school in so many ways, their teaching, their pastoral care, their assessment of your individual child, the staff they employ, I think you also have to trust them when it comes to things like fee increases and new building projects as well.

HG

"no increase in fees or even a reduction would have many running for the exit."

Really?

"I think you also have to trust them when it comes to things like fee increases and new building projects as well."

Really? Actually, the parents at the OP did rebel sometimes back on a different issue and the Junior(?) Head left shortly after.

Businesses that are in touch with their customers will live long and prosper, those who are not, will see a very sudden crash. Perhaps Tesco is a good example. Even Waitrose has not been busy raising prices but introduced value range instead.

HG Fri 03-Apr-15 11:46:02 "They have to run as business"

But topsy som e of the most over subscribed schools in the UK are also some of the most expensive.
Secondly you also quoted me out of context I clearly stated any change in approach brought about by increase in fees ......
If DS2's school didn't raise it's fees but this meant it stopped doing what it currently does I'd leave.
IME most parents do trust their schools I know from personal experience of experience at prep and friends experiences at other schools once you start mistrusting your schools decisions/actions it quickly escalates until you become thoroughly disgruntled.

HG - I apologise for not quoting the change of approach part as in:

"I suspect any change in approach brought about by either no increase in fees or even a reduction would have many running for the exit. "

This of course depends whether the change in approach is for better or for worse.

"once you start mistrusting your schools.. "

Trusts go both ways aren't they? Are market and cash cow driven pay up or go elsewhere approaches consistent with trust?

If schools reduce fees or don't increase them by cutting costs as suggested up threads then it's likely that something significant will change in the school. If Win Coll increased it's fees by 2.5 % of approx 35k year, the school generates about an extra 600k a year so if they was no increase what aspect of school life would be affected? I think we can safely assume that 600k was not building the head a jacuzzi so what will change? Up thread it suggested employ less teachers and have bigger classes. Or perhaps employ less groundsman ancillary staff etc. or maybe lots of smaller changes; e.g. stop providing refreshments for parents at parent teacher meeting surely no would leave because of that? But I suspects when parents pay out very considerable sums they expect beautiful gardens, a glass of wine at parent teacher meeting and small classes. It's all part of the whole package. IME parents have very high expectations.
A few years ago my DH was talking to a billionaire who he was doing some work for he asked "do you think this recession will effect people like you?" Will you spend less? His reply "we'll still spend our money but we're just going to make sure we're getting what we're paying for." For most people at Win Coll the 2.5% rise is a drop in the ocean as I said only slightly larger than the average termly extras bill and I'm pretty sure most parents would rather pay it and know that they're getting what they expect and want rather than have no increase or even a reduction and for savings to be made that will have some sort of change somewhere.
I've spent over thirty years in the public sector, despite what our government tells us there is no money left and changes are being constantly made to accommodate this, this results in poor staff moral so staff leave or go off sick, reducing moral further, the children we all work so hard for are suffering in all ways we cannot give the service we wish to give, this reduces staff moral even further, we face cuts in all aspects of our work and are constantly under pressure to perform in increasingly difficult situations and our ability to do the job is constantly being assessed and criticised, reducing moral even further. On top of this many didn't get pay increases this year, reducing even moral further. This is inevitable when you have to save money. This I don't believe is what parents pay fees for in fact the complete opposite.

HG - Well, I think our view points we are getting much closer now.

Firstly, as I said earlier, WC has shown significant restrain with a 2.5% fee increased especially given the pensions changes. Given RPI inflation is somewhat between 1-2%, I would not complain and would indeed pay it as you said.

Then we have those who think 7% is a fair game and they should charge 'what the market can bear'. Then you quoted what the billionaire said, which I presumed you agree else you wouldn't quote it this way:

"we'll still spend our money but we're just going to make sure we're getting what we're paying for."

So, parents do expect 7% improvements (either in match tea, parents evening canapés, exam results or happiness that sort of things). Just a shinny repainted sports hall or heated pool will not do.

Primarily because I'm nosey I would be interested to know the following: Are schools raising their fees by 7% already over subscribed? Are the current fees on a par with others in the area? Are they generous with their bursaries? Have current parents been encouraged to apply for bursary if the increase is going to cause problems. Is there a correlation between a 7% increase in fees and future building works? Has the school justified the increase e.g. we're building a new science block or we're taking on ten new teachers to reduce class size? Is this the first rise in a couple of years or is this becoming a regular thing?
7% does seem a lot to me.

Just got back from a rare internet-free holiday. Thanks for all the feedback, which I am going to read over the next day or two. On the last post, the one where I saw close to 7% is both over-sub'd and has some new facilities of note, but I was still shocked. If we get one-offs due to step changes over pensions, NI and meeting living wage commitments I can live with it. It's the thought of compounding at these rates that's deeply worrying.

With our fee increase letter (3%) to a school which is over-subscribed, there was the comment that they appreciate that paying school fees can be a struggle and that they have limited means-tested bursary money available and that anyone who feels they might need access to it should approach the school in confidence. The comment was worded positively and encouragingly - it seemed a genuine offer of help if necessary. I'm not sure what you would have to do to qualify - ie if your income would need to have fallen to the level below which bursaries for new entrants are given. I do know that if someone has lost their job or had a similar crisis, that they try hard to allow children part way through the school to continue there, at least until the next sensible break in education - ie to the end of GCSEs.

I've never expected school fees to follow inflation rates but as long as it's not something ludicrous like 10% - or that if the rise is quite high one year eg 6.5% and lower the next year 3%, to me that would be ok. I wouldn't pick a school that was very expensive to start off with (eg some in expensive parts of London) because they'd just get more and more expensive as time goes on - but clearly, if you are a millionaire, that wouldn't be a major concern. I heard that in some schools many parents are really struggling (this is just what I've heard - I don't know anyone admitting to it) to the point of being in arrears for some time; some school heads will also agree to a plan of payment that parents can manage if the rises are too sudden. But no, I've always expected the schools - if they are good - to increase their fees slightly over the rate of inflation some of the time. If the teachers and the lessons/other non-academic activities are good it is worth it. If they weren't good, then they would be at another school (either state or independent).

"but clearly, if you are a millionaire, that wouldn't be a major concern."

Unless the millions are inherited, they wouldn't be millionaire if they approach things this way. Even HG's billionaire acquittance is "going to make sure we're getting what we're paying for."

The increases are fine IF and only IF they make sense and bring correlated educational benefits. The power of compounding though, is that if they keep doing this, there will be a year in the (far) future where no one will be able to afford the school fees - not even the millionaire.

I noted a good few references to oligarchs in some earlier posts. My kids are not in a school with kids of oligarchs, at least not in the day groups. The parents are local professionals and business types like us. If we get compound increases of the order of 5 to 7% I can't see any way of us keeping our older child in till 6th form, let alone the younger one. I'm worried about the near future, not the far one.

roguedad I think that actually there is enough of a market of wealthy people in your school's area plus demand for private day places for the school to be able to risk losing families like yourselves. The fulltime boarders (if I am guessing the school right) actually pay more than proper full time boarding schools with 6 day teaching including Eton and Winchester. That suggests a school that is very much prepared to continue increasing fees whilst they can find families to pay even if it changes its client base.

I would have thought that the squeezed middle would be more concerned about the ridiculous rise in housing costs, rather than in school fees. Housing is essential and has to be paid for a the point of use. Education is still, in this country, available free to all at the point of use. I wonder if those entitled MC who complain about 'forriners' coming into our top schools and pricing them out of places make the same point about pressure on housing by the parents of those same children moving here from Russia and China (and other countries)? MC in this country had a very cushy existence, now the rest of the world quite reasonably wants some of it - the world changes and if you can't accept that you need to vote UKIP and delude yourself that you can hold back change...

ArcangelaTarabotti - The housing market, the house seller, BTL landlords, Barratt et all don't call themselves charity do they?

The few housing charities that are still around do not increase rents to what the 'market can bear'.

Unfortunately that's not the case topsy777:
www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/29/tenants-face-70m-rent-rise-as-social-housing-converted-to-affordable-homes

Clavinova -Not necessarily. Housing Association are not necessarily charity
and this:

"Charity Commission tells providers to seek legal advice on implications of charging 80 per cent rent. Housing associations risk losing their charitable status if they implement the government’s new affordable rent regime."

Perhaps CC should also have a word with some of the Independent Education 'charity'.

The Charity Commission has already tried to challenge the charity status of independent schools and lost! There was a landmark court case 3 or 4 years ago and the Independent Schools Council won.The case revealed that private schools received 100 million per year in tax benefits but spent 260 million per year on bursaries.

The Housing Associations mentioned in the Guardian are charities I believe hence the reference to the Charity Commission.

Many charities are run as big businesses now - how many charity executives earn over £100,000 pa? How many of those 'charity workers' on the high street who wave direct debit forms at me are volunteers? How much do charities spend on advertising or lobbying each year?

It was a Tribunal case, and it found in favour of schools in that the provision of bursaries was considered neither necessary nor sufficient to meet the 'test' of charitable activity. They were not attempting to change the charitable status of schools, but did attempt to impose new conditions upon them. Those new conditions were not upheld.

The provision of education is, in itself, a charitable activity in Britain, and there was no appetite by the then Government to change it.

It also exposed how much it would cost the state if these schools no longer existed as charities and therefore under current law had to close (no change in law has yet been proposed by anyone to allow a charity to close and transfer assets to a private entity as a going concern).

Has the Labour Party made a manifesto pledge on this?

Funny analogy with charities. When someone comes up to me rattling a tin it's rather up to me how much to put in, and they do not prefix their plea for dosh with a request for an inflation+++ increase on what you put in last time. As a paid up member of the squeezed middle I am concerned about housing costs, but frankly my outgoings on school fees are about 4 times my mortgage so it's my main concern.