Girls allowed ankle socks, but boys not at school - is this indirect discrimination?

[TooHotKeepCool]

At my DC's school, the girls are allowed to wear ankle socks with knee length skirts. However, the boys must wear knee-high socks with their shorts. If the boys want to wear ankle socks, they must wear trousers.

Please can someone tell me from a legal point of view if this is in line with the Equality Act 2010 and if it's indirect discrimination?

Thank you for your help!

Can the boys wear ankle socks with skirts?

If so, it may not be discriminatory at all...

It's all bonkers!

Girls used to wear knee high socks with skirts.

Unfortunately the 'sexy schoolgirl' idea including in porn has a long time been the kilt skirt and the knee high socks were the things used for this.

The combination became associated with 'sexy'.

So they changed to ankle high. Tackling the symptom but not the cause.

My DD school explicitly bans knee high socks with skirts.

Does your son want to wear knee high socks?

Thing to do is approach the school and try and get it changed.

Presumably it is school uniform policy for that particular school. It sounds OK to me, boys look quite nice with long socks and short trousers.

Just because it's a policy doesn't make it a fair policy. Long socks and shorts look daft

@FixTheBone

No, the boys cannot wear skirts with ankle socks.

Umm, they’re socks? The only reason I can imagine why that anyone would care would be if they had sensory issues in which case disability discrimination would be a better course of action.

@Maggiesfarm

Long socks in the summer is very hot. I'm not concerned about looks, but comfort in hot weather.

Talk to the school.

@NiceGerbil

I did, but was basically told that policies take time to change (i.e. not before end of term).

It would only be indirect discrimination (or direct) if the boys are somehow disadvantaged by this.

What disadvantage is caused by not wearing ankle socks? I think it's a hard one to argue.

If schools are the same as workplaces legally, then it's not discrimination. The law re workplaces says that uniform has to be of equivalent smartness but doesn't have to be identical. In the past this has meant that uniform where the woman has to wear a skirt and men trousers is non-discriminatory.

High heel rules are ripe for legal challenge in my view. Socks less so.

OP you need to get other parents on board.

End of term is a few weeks away. Policies do take a while to change tbf.

Try to get it changed for next year.

Or, get some other parents onboard and see if they will agree to temporarily allow it due to the unusually hot weather.

If ankle socks are acceptable for one sex they should be acceptable for both.

It's similar to girls being allowed to wear knee length skirts in the summer but that boys have to continue to wear trousers. The girls are therefore able to keep a lot cooler than the boys in the summer months.

Knee length socks are hot.

Yeah I agree OP. I'd like to know an adult that would choose to wear knee length socks on a hot day!

I've explained that the reason for loads of schools banning knee length socks for girls is because of the 'sexy schoolgirl' thing.

That option is often no longer available because of pervy men.

Not because it keeps them cool.

Currently the boys and the girls both have one sock option.

Do you want the boys to have one- short? Some children may not want to wear short socks.

If you want a choice for boys be aware that it would be surprising if the schools said girls could choose knee length.

Having you uniform changed because even though you're a child you might make some grown men think of sex is not a privilege.

'Knee length socks are hot.'

This is the problem yes. But not in the way you mean it.

@Level75

Found a document re dress code guidance in the workplace online, published by the Government Equalities Office:

Dress codes can be a legitimate part of an employer’s terms and conditions of service. There are different ways of achieving a professional “look” among employees, but it is important that a dress code does not discriminate, for example, by allowing both men and
women to wear trousers in the workplace.

Dress policies for men and women do not have to be identical. However, the standards imposed should be equivalent. This means there must be similar or equivalent rules laid down for both male and female employees. Any less favourable treatment because of
sex could be direct discrimination. Dress codes must not lead to harassment by colleagues or customers, so any requirements on women to dress in a provocative manner are likely to be unlawful on those grounds.

It is advisable to avoid gender specific prescriptive requirements. For example, any requirement to wear make-up, have manicured nails, wear hair in certain styles or to wear specific types of hosiery or skirts is likely to be unlawful, assuming there is no equivalent requirement for men. A dress code that requires all employees to ‘dress smartly’ would be lawful, provided the definition of ‘smart’ is reasonable. For example, a two-piece suit in a similar colour for both men and women, with low-heeled shoes for both sexes.

Of course, this doesn't apply to school children though. It seems that schools can decide what they want to.

@NiceGerbil

'Knee length socks are hot.'
Yes, I see how that can be misunderstood!

@starfishy

I know! And what parent would get their children to wear knee high socks in the height of summer outside of school?

Do you want the boys to have one- short? Some children may not want to wear short socks

But the girls only have this option. So why shouldnt the boys? They currently have two options. Long socks with shorts or ankle socks with trousers. Girls have to wear ankle socks.

I'm presuming that when your child started at that school you knew what the uniform was

Your best bet is taking it up with the school. Ours insists on a felt wool blazer being worn whatever the weather. Whilst it looks smart, it’s not practical for the 3 or 4 weeks a year where it’s 26 degrees.