New headmaster sends dozens of kids home on his first day at school.

First topic message reminder :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3775968/Police-called-school-sends-FIFTY-children-home-day-term-weren-t-wearing-right-uniform.html

Today for the second day running he has refused to allow another 20 children in to be taught because of minor dress discrepancies.

Is he right....or is sending a child home on his first day of starting at secondary school because they are wearing white socks instead of black, or suede shoes instead of leather, proving that he is, as some parents have complained, acting like the gestapo?

"Police were forced to intervene today as parents protested outside a school after 60 children were sent home because of a 'Gestapo-like' approach to uniform.

One girl was left with bleeding feet after being forced to remove her socks while another was turned away at the gates of Hartsdown Academy for wearing trainers to prevent hip pain after a car accident.

Teachers even sent home Ellie King, 14, whose picture is used to advertise the school on the side of buses, for wearing black trainers, which she has been doing for three years.

Of the 60 pupils who were sent home, only half returned back to the school later in the day."

There are no excuses at all for not having uniform, though I will say, uniform should be free.

It is free... That's part of what child benefit is paid out for!!!

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:All supermarkets sell school clothes... and primark too... and all bloody cheap!!!


Are you really trying to say that out of the whole school... only one girl was so tall as to not be able to find a skirt of regulation length...?


And none of the ones in question had the correct required uniform... That's WHY they were refused entry!!!

I know all supermarkets sell school clothes, I said if they are made to measure to get a longer length they would be costly.

One girls mother spoke about her girl being 5'10'' and the normal school skirt was too short on her. Maybe there were others, not everyone was interviewed.

The head was looking for fault....no doubt he will ban mobiles next, just to ensure that NONE of them can phone home when he turfs them out.

Only one tall girl in whole school... who couldn't find a skirt long enough...?


Rubbish!!!

eddie wrote:There are no excuses at all for not having uniform, though I will say, uniform should be free.

In my opinion parents should buy the uniforms, they are cheaper than normal clothes, in fact they are as cheap now as they were when my own son went to school 20 years ago.

But blazers and more expensive items should be standard with the school badge bought separately and sewn on rather than having to go to an expensive specialist shop (which my grandson had to do)

Tommy Monk wrote:It is free... That's part of what child benefit is paid out for!!!

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:There are no excuses at all for not having uniform, though I will say, uniform should be free.

In my opinion  parents should buy the uniforms, they are cheaper than normal clothes, in fact they are as cheap now as they were when my own son went to school 20 years ago.

But blazers and more expensive  items should be standard with the school badge bought separately and sewn on rather than having to go to an expensive specialist shop (which my grandson had to do)

That's what I meant - the logo stuff - should be free

Tommy Monk wrote:It is free... That's part of what child benefit is paid out for!!!

Tommy. Have you any idea how poor some people are?

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

In my opinion  parents should buy the uniforms, they are cheaper than normal clothes, in fact they are as cheap now as they were when my own son went to school 20 years ago.

But blazers and more expensive  items should be standard with the school badge bought separately and sewn on rather than having to go to an expensive specialist shop (which my grandson had to do)

That's what I meant - the logo stuff - should be free

Yes....it's that that makes a uniform costly.....it's a con.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:

I know all supermarkets sell school clothes, I said if they are made to measure to get a longer length they would be costly.

One girls mother spoke about her girl being 5'10'' and the normal school skirt was too short on her. Maybe there were others, not everyone was interviewed.

The head was looking for fault....no doubt he will ban mobiles next, just to ensure that NONE of them can phone home when he turfs them out.

Only one tall girl in whole school... who couldn't find a skirt long enough...?


Rubbish!!!

You are the only one saying there was only ONE tall girl.

That is another reason that child benefit is paid out... to pay for the logos...

Tommy Monk wrote:That is another reason that child benefit is paid out... to pay for the logos...

Don't be a moron. You're talking utter fuckeries. Again, do you not know how poor some people are?

Syl... you are the one saying that there was only one tall girl refused entry for too short a skirt...!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl... you are the one saying that there was only one tall girl refused entry for too short a skirt...!

No, I said one mother gave an interview giving the reason her daughters skirt did not meet the required length was because she was 5'10''.

There could have been others, not every parent gave interviews.

Tommy Monk wrote:That is another reason that child benefit is paid out... to pay for the logos...

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:That is another reason that child benefit is paid out... to pay for the logos...

Don't be a moron. You're talking utter fuckeries. Again, do you not know how poor some people are?

I like that expression...

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:That is another reason that child benefit is paid out... to pay for the logos...

Don't be a moron. You're talking utter fuckeries. Again, do you not know how poor some people are?

Syl said all the kids refused entry had working parents...


How many of the kids were refused entry for not having a school logo badge on their blazers...?


From what I read it was mostly those turning up in expensive trainers and tracksuits instead of the cheaply purchased regulation shoes and trousers/skirts...

It was me not Syl, who made that post.

And I'm talking about ALL people - not the parents of the pupils at this school.

Do you not understand that some people are poor?

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl... you are the one saying that there was only one tall girl refused entry for too short a skirt...!

No, I said one mother gave an interview giving the reason her daughters skirt did not meet the required length was because she was 5'10''.

There could have been others, not every parent gave interviews.

No... the reason her daughters skirt did not meet required length is because she did not buy a long enough length skirt!!!


Although it appears that the schools suggested uniform retailer does supply skirts in 4 different lengths...





All uniform can be purchased at:

Riggers
139 Northdown Road
Cliftonville
Margate
CT9 2QY
018422 280 900

http://www.riggersltd.co.uk

We strongly recommend that parents purchase the uniform from Riggers as:

They will advise on appropriateness
As long as you do not go against their advice, they will refund if there are any issues
Riggers keep uniform stock throughout the year
They do a range of skirts and trousers for all size
Riggers current costs:

Blazer with badge £27
Skirts (4 lengths) £11.95
Trousers £ 13 – 16

Please note students not in correct uniform will not be allowed on site.





Plus... girls are allowed to wear trousers too these days aren't they...?

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:

Don't be a moron. You're talking utter fuckeries. Again, do you not know how poor some people are?

Syl said all the kids refused entry had working parents...


How many of the kids were refused entry for not having a school logo badge on their blazers...?


From what I read it was mostly those turning up in expensive trainers and tracksuits instead of the cheaply purchased regulation shoes and trousers/skirts...

I haven't said that at all....I have no idea whether the parents worked or not.

The logo was a different subject, I don't think that was mentioned in reports re this school.

It's irrelevant. Am I speaking in freaking ancient tongues?
Tommy said that child benefit was for stuff like uniforms - meaning in general, the country over.
I'm asking him, doesn't he know how poor some people are?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:
No, I said one mother gave an interview giving the reason her daughters skirt did not meet the required length was because she was 5'10''.

There could have been others, not every parent gave interviews.

No... the reason her daughters skirt did not meet required length is because she did not buy a long enough length skirt!!!


Although it appears that the schools suggested uniform retailer does supply skirts in 4 different lengths...





All uniform can be purchased at:

Riggers
139 Northdown Road
Cliftonville
Margate
CT9 2QY
018422 280 900

http://www.riggersltd.co.uk

We strongly recommend that parents purchase the uniform from Riggers as:

They will advise on appropriateness
As long as you do not go against their advice, they will refund if there are any issues
Riggers keep uniform stock throughout the year
They do a range of skirts and trousers for all size
Riggers current costs:

Blazer with badge £27
Skirts (4 lengths) £11.95
Trousers £ 13 – 16

Please note students not in correct uniform will not be allowed on site.





Plus... girls are allowed to wear trousers too these days aren't they...?

The skirts are only different lengths because of the waist size. The school has pupils aged from 11 to 16....obviously the lengths will differ re age requirement.

He is recommending a specialist shop btw....far more expensive than supermarket school uniforms.

eddie wrote:It's irrelevant. Am I speaking in freaking ancient tongues?
Tommy said that child benefit was for stuff like uniforms - meaning in general, the country over.
I'm asking him, doesn't he know how poor some people are?

Haha I'm amusing you?

Child benefit is of course given to help with costs of children... clothes will of course be an acceptable use for part of this money... and that includes clothes worn and worn out through school use... this will be either uniform clothes or non uniform clothes... all of which still cost money and get worn/used and worn out!!!


If you have a child and they have a pair of trainers that they wear to school and during school and as well as outside of school... then they are going to be worn out twice as quick than if child has a separate pair of shoes for school and only wears the trainers outside of school...


Overall the cost is going to be much less because the cheaper shoes will be getting worn out more than the trainers (that probably cost a lot more) and which will subsequently be lasting at least twice as long than they had been if being worn at school too!


Same goes for clothes... the kids need clothes to wear regardless of whether at school or not... it's cheaper in the long run to have them wearing and wearing out the cheaper school uniform clothes at school than having them going through twice as much of their preferred and much more expensive non school uniform clothes by being able to wear it all at school as well as outside of school too!!!


If parents can afford to be buying their kids twice the amount of expensive clothes to wear out in school and outside school too... then they have enough money to buy a full set of relatively much cheaper school uniform clothes for the kids to wear and Wear out at school... and are actually better off than they would otherwise be if they instead had to be buying extra lots of expensive clothes for their kids to wear and Wear out at school...!

Right so all you've come back with, after boiling the kettle and scratching your balls, is a shopping list (mainly of trainers) and what one might do with them or where one might wear them.

I've read your monologue on footwear twice but I couldn't see the answer to my question.

What question...?


If it's child benefit then see my last post...

Tommy Monk wrote:What question...?


If it's child benefit then see my last post...

Your post about trainers? I've asked the question a few times on this thread.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:It's irrelevant. Am I speaking in freaking ancient tongues?
Tommy said that child benefit was for stuff like uniforms - meaning in general, the country over.
I'm asking him, doesn't he know how poor some people are?

This question

Child benefit is given to HELP ALL PARENTS with SOME OF THE BASIC COSTS of THEIR CHILDREN... including BASIC COSTS for CLOTHES FOR SCHOOL!!!


Now... all of these children were wearing bought and paid for clothes when attending the school and being refused entry for not being the required uniform...?


Then instead of the money in each case being used to buy non school uniform clothing... the money should have been used to buy the proper required school uniform clothing instead and what child benefit is given to all as a part of providing the money for all to buy!!!

You know Tommy, you can never again accuse anyone of waffle or not answering a question.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

This question

Maybe people with kids use food banks for fun.

Tommy Monk wrote:What question...?


If it's child benefit then see my last post...

Look at this practically Tommy.
Child benefit is £20.70 for the first child £13.70 for subsequent children. School dinners is on average £2 per day .....that leaves £3.70 for the second and other kids, to last the week.
The average low paid hard working family are hardly living in luxury spending the child allowance on luxuries.

eddie wrote:You know Tommy, you can never again accuse anyone of waffle or not answering a question.

I've been trying to answer the question I thought you were asking... Maybe I'm answering the wrong question...?


So can you reply with the right question you want me your answer and I will do so...?





And syl... child benefit is to help pay for some of the costs of your children... not all the costs...


They were all wearing clothes that were bought and paid gor... they should have bought the correct ones instead of the wrong ones...

Some of the reasons were petty, but even if they had turned up in neon moon boots he had no right to refuse them entry to school.

After all the parents were at fault not the children, who were forced to mill about outside on a main road putting themselves in danger.
Some of the kids were just out of primary school for Gods sake.

He had every right to refuse entry... yhe school website is very clear about uniform policy.

For the nth time:

Don't you realise how poor some people in this country, are?

You seem to think that most people on benefits don't struggle with costly school uniforms . So. Do you understand how poor some people are. And please, don't start waffling on about trainers.

Muchadoaboutnothing,

The head iz a over zealous pretentious twack.

If he were a responsible manager he would have done his paid duty, taught the children and communicated with their parentz.

I he worked for me he would be up the road with hiz P49 for bringing my business into disrepute.

He iz putting hiz personal preferencez before the childrenz eddificashun.

I bet some of the little bleeduz can't spell.

eddie wrote:For the nth time:

Don't you realise how poor some people in this country, are?

You seem to think that most people on benefits don't struggle with costly school uniforms . So. Do you understand how poor some people are.  And please, don't start waffling on about trainers.

They turned up in clothes that cost money... just not the clothes that were required...

Don't tell me they can afford one but not the other.


Plus if parents are struggling to buy all the uniform in time because they simply cannot afford it all then they can speak to the school ahead of time and get special arrangements.


School clothes are so cheap that there is no excuse for not buying them.


Funny how some plead poverty when they are having cars and holidays and sky TV and big tvs and nice mobile phones... and the kids are walking about in £100 trainers and jewelery...

Solve the problem, Schools buy the Uniforms if they want pupils to wear one.
In the long Summer hols the teachers get part time jobs to pay for them.

Just an idea!

nicko wrote:Solve the problem,   Schools buy the Uniforms if they want pupils to wear one.
In the long Summer hols the teachers get part time jobs to pay for them.

Just an idea!

I don't think that'll go down well with teachers!

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:For the nth time:

Don't you realise how poor some people in this country, are?

You seem to think that most people on benefits don't struggle with costly school uniforms . So. Do you understand how poor some people are.  And please, don't start waffling on about trainers.

They turned up in clothes that cost money... just not the clothes that were required...

Don't tell me they can afford one but not the other.


Plus if parents are struggling to buy all the uniform in time because they simply cannot afford it all then they can speak to the school  ahead of time and get special arrangements.


School clothes are so cheap that there is no excuse for not buying them.


Funny how some plead poverty when they are having cars and holidays and sky TV and big tvs and nice mobile phones... and the kids are walking about in £100 trainers and jewelery...

His list to parents about the school uniforms reccomended they be bought from a specialist shop where parents would pay double/treble the price of other outlets. It wouldn't be cheap to kit out a child in the school uniform from the shop he "strongly recommended" would it?

How do you know any of the children refused entry were wearing £100 trainers or jewelry?
You are embellishing this story to suit your own argument now.

Tommy you're talking absolute fuckeries again

Prices listed didn't sound expensive to me... I posted them earlier...


And if they can be bought even cheaper then even less excuse is there...!?


All of the examples listed were easily rectified for very little cost.

Tommy Monk wrote:Prices listed didn't sound expensive to me... I posted them earlier...


And if they can be bought even cheaper then even less excuse is there...!?


All of the examples listed were easily rectified for very little cost.

Uniform items priced individually from a supermarket (not the shop he recommended which would cost a fortune) are cheap enough....but when you add up at 2 or 3 changes for each child, gym gear, books and stationary, football kit etc....especially if you have more than one child, it can stretch a tight budget to the limit.

If you have kids or grandkids you know that, if you don't you are talking out of your arse.....no offence.

A pair of trousers or a skirt can be bought for a fiver each... and 3 shirts or 3 girls shirts/blouses can be got for a tenner... a pair of shoes is less than a tenner...


Socks couple quid for pack of 5...


Get blazer from primark or supermarket for a tenner...



It's not a lot of money considering £20 a week in child benefit is £1000 a year!!!


School uniform is not a new thing...


How many kids at the school...?


All the others seemed to manage it ok...


Eddie said all the parents were working... so what about all the other kids with parents on benefits who managed to meet the requirements ok...?


You also miss the point that kids will need clothes regardless... school clothes are a hell of a lot cheaper than out of school clothes...

I dont know where you can get good leather shoes for £10. I just checked on Asda online...the cheapest boys shoes age 11/12 were £16...and none of them would have suited Hitler, he banned Velcro or boot types.

The other thing about school uniforms, especially when it's a new school which is was for the 11 year olds, all the clothes have to be bought together, which is a huge cost to someone who is struggling on low wages.
Maybe people on benefits can get help (not sure) but thousands of families are earning just above the level where they can get financial help.

No... they all get financial help in the form of child benefit!!!


At £1000 a year for child 1... surely out of that they can get a set of school uniform..!?

Tommy Monk wrote:No... they all get financial help in the form of child benefit!!!


At £1000 a year for child 1... surely out of that they can get a set of school uniform..!?

OK....work it out your way then.
So child benefit amounts to £1000 a year...nearer £700 for second and further children.

The average cost in the UK of bringing up a child till he/she is 21 is £230.000.......child benefit amounts to £16.000 if the child leaves full time education at 16.....and that's at the higher level.
Leaving parents to find £214.000 per child..
It doesn't seem so much now does it?

link...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11360819/Average-cost-of-raising-a-child-in-UK-230000.html


"Parents face bills of almost a quarter of a million pounds to raise just one child to the age of 21, new research shows.


Surging childcare fees and expenses linked to education mean the basic cost of bringing up a child in the UK has risen 50 per cent faster than inflation over more than a decade"

It's as simple as this... the rules are there for a reason... and if there are rules then they have to be enforced or they mean nothing!!!


And do you know what the result of lax uniform enforcement is...?

Little Johnny starts coming home saying he ain't gonna wear the £16 shoes to school anymore cos all the others are allowed to wear trainers... and he ain't gonna settle for any old cheap pair of trainers to wear... he's gonna want ones that cost a hell of a lot more than £16 quid!!!

Little Joanne starts coming home saying that all the other girls are wearing make up and jewelery and with boutique haircuts and designer bags etc... so she wants the same or that's not fair and she hates you for making her have to suffer being without all the things all her friends are allowed to have...


So... either you want cheap school uniforms to be worn and worn out and grown out of...?

Or you want a free for all where the school starts to be a bloody fashion parade where more and more expensive clothes are demanded by the kids, which ends up costing a lot more times what a cheap uniform ser would have cost... and the poorer kids are ridiculed for turning up in primark etc...


And about mobile phones... parents will argue that they want their child to have one in the interests of safety so they can be contacted and can contact parents in event of emergency...

But... in schools there is a similar race to have the best or look poor etc... and phones are targeted for theft creating many other problems... and before you know it they are also being used to film fights or various many other sorts of possible inappropriate stuff and then circulated among the kids... as well as the online bullying/sexting/downloading etc...