Uniform enforcement - please help!

[HorryIsUpduffed]

I get confused by comments about the extent to which a standard English state primary school (ie not academy, but direct LA) can enforce a uniform policy.

DS's school has a few items available with logo (sweatshirt/cardigan, fleece, pinafore) and has previously operated on a fairly generous policy on logo items, in that they have been completely optional and worn by maybe half the school.

The uniform is* black/charcoal bottoms; white, light green or dark green polo shirt, dark green sweatshirt/cardigan. In summer girls often wear standard from-anywhere gingham dresses in light or dark green. The fleece is also dark green.

• not precisely these colours, changing one or two to be less identifiable, since the details don't matter, just the gist.

More recently some children have been wearing grey or white cardigans/jumpers, or wearing their fleeces as jumpers but not bringing a coat.

So the head and governors have decreed that from now on only green school sweatshirts/cardigans will be permitted as the warm layer inside. Children can still wear the fleece as a coat, but not as a jumper IYSWIM, and they should no longer wear un-logoed jumpers/cardigans. Non-logo polo shirts are still allowed. School declares it does not make a profit on uniform sold through the office.

I'm annoyed because I had an exchange with the head maybe six months ago explaining that DS doesn't wear the logo jumper because I prefer him to wear 100% cotton wherever possible and the logo jumper is only 40% cotton. At that point I was assured that although school liked the children to wear logos they were by no means compulsory. On that basis I stocked up on 100% cotton sweatshirts when I saw them in the sales, supermarkets, etc.

So my questions are these:

Are they actually allowed to require logo items rather than just specifying a colour? This is the point where looking back on old threads confuses me because some people say yes and some say no.

If they are allowed to specify (grumble grumble) then how long a lead time is reasonable for making this change - and they are acknowledging that it is a change - a term? six months? a year? Wear the existing ones until they need replacing, or replace them ASAP?

Again, for clarity, this is a non-denominational county primary school in England, under normal LA control with no church or other independent input.

Thanks in advance. I don't know whether to be cross or just annoyed.

The rules have no teeth. I really think schools should be made to provide sew-on logos, or at the very least have exemptions for children who need to wear natural fabrics for health reasons. It's all very well to say you can wear a vest under your crappy 60% polyester polo shirt, but when it's 30C in the classroom that isn't really a very humane solution.

tiggy I fought that battle with DD1's middle school - complete with info from doctor and photos of the permanent awful rash round her middle where the polyester crap lay against her skin. It was a no go - apparently eczema isn't a disability, and it does often get better with age. So she had to cope for two years. Fortunately we are now 2 tier and from Yr7 she has been allowed to wear whatever white school blouse we want - M&S skinkind rocks.

I often see children going to school wearing very old polo shirts with logos. May be the quality is so poor that the shirts have lost the colour or may be they have been wearing the same polo-shirts for a few years in a row; could be from older siblings. Does not look nice I would say but this is what this schools want - LOGO.
The schools gain from it quite well (could be as much as 20%). They also have websites selling overpriced things with a quarter going into their budget. But do not we all look for a bargain?

pointythings, I agree with you.
Also shoes in the summer and no sandals. That is pretty cruel when it is really hot.

I'd get an old school jumper, cut out the logo and stitch it onto a new 100% cotton one.

I do think schools over-obsess about uniform. A number of European countries have no uniform at all and do at least as well as UK schools academically. I see the argument that it stops children competing about designer brands, but you can deal with that just by specifying things like grey/black skirts and trousers and white shirts. It really annoys me that my children's school makes us buy polo shirts with logos on that cost £10 more than the same shirts without logos.

See if you can get a hold of a sew-on logo from the uniform supplier. Our school allows parents to do this so they can sew it on themselves if they prefer their child to have a different jumper.

I work in a special school - Reception to 6th Form. We have a very simple uniform - white polo shirt, navy sweatshirt and grey trousers for boys and white polo shirt, navy sweatshirt, grey trousers or skirts for girls. Girls can wear grey pinafores if they want to. This is for the Primary Department. Secondary wear white polo shirts with black sweatshirts and grey trousers (grey skirts for girls if they want to wear them but most wear trousers). We do not have a logo as most parents voted not to have one. The uniform items can be bought at a reasonable cost from most stores and from the the supermarkets. Much cheaper than school uniform shops or buying from schools and our pupils look very smart. The 6th form pupils do not wear uniform.

Hello Horry

Can't add much to what tiggytape has said. There have been policies for years that say that schools must not go overboard on insisting on logo-ed items, must have regard to the costs of uniform and must not enter into monopoly supply arrangements. The recent publicity was referring back to these old statements.

But, as has been said, much depends on how these are interpreted. As far as I can remember, there is nothing to say what a reasonable lead-in time for a new uniform policy would be. Ultimately, a court could adjudicate although, realistically, would it ever get that far?

On enforcement, primary schools can enforce their uniform policy but the reality is that their options for enforcement are pretty limited. Again, this is covered on the old threads.

The HT's most recent newsletter insists this is enforcement of existing policies, not a change of policy. Since I have correspondence under a year old confirming that logos are "parental choice" ie optional, and we haven't had a new uniform policy since, I'm

Hmm. I think we're getting into semantics here. The 'wrong' uniform was accepted/tolerated for a while and now it is not, so parents have to dispose of the 'wrong' kit and get the right stuff.

The new/old D for E guidance is here. All it says is that schools must consider the timeframe for making changes.

Op Have you actually spoken to the head about this and your wish to have the 100% cotton jumpers?

It sounds to me more like they are attempting to get a more uniform look and not having what sounded like a lot of different colours. I doubt there will be much issue over the ones your child are wearing.

I haven't spoken to him, no, because at the moment I have other more important things to talk to him about (inc hellish PTA paperwork) and am mere days off giving birth, fingers crossed.

I do intend to leave it as long as possible though. The undefined timescale and my previous correspondence will be useful there.