1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Lunch payments overdue: children put in lunch isolation

Discussion in 'Education news' started by monicabilongame, Jul 29, 2016.

  1. DYNAMO67

    DYNAMO67 Lead commenter

    In this scenario I think it could be seen as acceptable to provide a level of care that meets the basic needs of the dog but any extras that may be offered (individual tailored walks/ grooming etc.) that are above the basic need held back if there is no commitment or ability from the owners to cover the costs.
  2. Orkrider2

    Orkrider2 Star commenter

    So the point still stands that you don't do anything that will be detrimental to the dog.
    With the significance this school seem to attach to 'family lunch' and their ethos of making sure everyone mixes in as part of an inclusive community, it seems that by isolating the child during a time that is designated as supervised social time, they're not even slightly concerned about the detrimental effects this may have on the child in question.
    Regardless of where you stand on how long is acceptable for a payment to be late before sanctions should begin, or whether parents are more often than not simply irresponsible rather than so hard up they can't afford to pay, the fact of the matter is that the school could have handled this in a manner in which the welfare of the child was kept as a priority. But they didn't, and for that they should be ashamed.
    monicabilongame likes this.
  3. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    This makes the point very well. Amusing to see some of the uncomfortable responses to it.

    If you see it as acceptable to punish a child for the actions of their parent you're simply not suitable or fit to be working with children.

    If the owner of a kennels did such a thing to an animal they would almost certainly lose their right to look after animals. They say the mark of a civilised nation can be measured by how it treats its animals. Strangely in this country there are no small number that treat animals considerably better than children.
    vannie likes this.
  4. GeordieKC

    GeordieKC Occasional commenter

    With the analogy to dog kennels, surely the kennel would simply not accept the dog again and possibly even refuse to return the dog to its owner until the full bill was paid. Turning students away at the school gate would surely be even more of a punishment than what the school is actually proposing.

    If we are going to run schools more along business lines then situations like this are going to become more common. The parents need to show some initiative to deal with the problem, it should be them approaching the school rather than the other way around. If the parents do not cooperate then the school is going to have to take some action to limit its bad debts.
  5. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    What do you mean if......they already are.
  6. Orkrider2

    Orkrider2 Star commenter

    Point is still that punishing the dog wouldn't be the appropriate method of trying to convince the owners to pay. There are other ways of approaching the parents for the money.

    It was one week. That hardly constitutes a bad debt. While parents in general should always be aware of payments owed and bills that have to be paid, I suspect it's neither uncommon, nor the sign of a bad/uncooperative parent to find that something has slipped your mind and you've missed the payment for something by a few days. I know I have. My children's school have always either sent a text or made a quick phone call to remind me, giving me the benefit of the doubt and allowing me to rectify the situation before declaring it a bad debt and starting to issue sanctions. There is no reason why the school couldn't have done the same in the first instance, rather than going straight to punishment for the child.
  7. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    Why not chain the kids to a table and make them wear a placard or something.

    Has anyone considered what effect it might have on these children ?.

    I would never go near any of these free schools
    monicabilongame likes this.
  8. Flere-Imsaho

    Flere-Imsaho Star commenter

    But there's going to be stigma if the child is served elsewhere. Michaela eat in form group tables with their teacher and are expected to converse politely during lunch. They would notice an empty chair more than in other schools, I think.
  9. les25paul

    les25paul Star commenter

    So do I.

    But I find it even more offensive that some schools think its acceptable to prevent (those who choose to) people praying to their God. Its a right paid for in blood and not one a Head Teacher should even think about taking away.
    monicabilongame likes this.
  10. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

    Nobody needs to pray in schools - let them do so at home if they so wish. Separate education from all religions.
    MamaPyjama likes this.
  11. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

    Nobody yet has suggested what the school could actually do to ensure the bill is paid.
  12. les25paul

    les25paul Star commenter

    If you had the year 9 class I had last year, you might :)
  13. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    It was suggested more than once - the usual legal process: The Small Claims Court. Followed by Can't Pay We'll Take it Away.
  14. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    I'd agree with equally offensive but I can't see why it should be more offensive. I don't see it as a 'right paid for in blood' either and even if you argue it to be the case that's hardly a great argument.
  15. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    It can begin by employing somebody competent to run its business.
  16. Mr_Ed

    Mr_Ed Established commenter

    I have!

    Apparently, there is a lot of demand amongst local parents to get their children into this school.

    If they can afford school meals but choose not to pay, in other words they don't meet the requirements of FSM, but are just playing the system, then after say half-a-term of non-payment, tell the parents that their kid(s) are no longer welcome at the school anymore e.g. the kid is expelled.

    I'm pretty sure that a cheque or indeed cash would be forthcoming ASAP, because, as I said, the school is a popular one.
    FrankWolley likes this.
  17. vannie

    vannie Star commenter

    So anyone who doesn't meet the FSM threshold is choosing not to pay? The threshold is £15,000 a year. Do you not see it as remotely possible that a family that don't meet the threshold might be struggling? In London?
    You would expel a child from school because that child's parents hasn't paid?
    It isn't yet possible to do this, but we have another 3 1/2 years of tory rule so here's hoping eh?
  18. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    Of course he would. These people are bad for business. Better orf in the workhouse.
    vannie likes this.
  19. Mr_Ed

    Mr_Ed Established commenter

    Yes, I would.

    See post #24

    This actual reminds me of arguments I had when universal free meals were brought in for KS1 - something the coalition government 'achieved'. I can't remember how that got the green light - I think it was a stitch up between Clegg and Gove, you do this and we support the new GCSEs, or something.

    However, the bottom line is, it is crazy that my taxes are paying for Reception, Year 1 & Year 2 kids called Tarquin or Farquhar, whose parents can quite easily pay for school meals themselves. It is bonkers!
  20. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    Everything about that was bonkers. Not least the cost of the new kitchens for a policy that would inevitably be kicked into touch in the near future.
    Mr_Ed likes this.

Share This Page