oh and i bet when she bought the unhealthy pointless meal deal she paid for that there and then

she didnt think she coud get it for free and then wait for Tesco to contact her on her terms and when she looks at her phone and get her to pay

...of course food is thrown out from kitchens every single school day, Vicky...and by the head’s own words this rule was only ever designed to punish a child for a parental error...The headteacher said the 'bread and butter' rule was brought in so that children are denied a school lunch whenever a family owes more than £10....the family owes money../..the parent owes money...so the child will be denied a lunch...how is that not Dickensian...if it’s felt that these parents..(...not just the mother..)..are guilty of bad parenting in some way..?...then the primary solution to that from an establishment with a duty of care to children...is to uphold some £10 rule and give the children bread and butter only...(...while food is most definitely being thrown out..:laugh:..)

...no they don’t I’m afraid, Alf...seconds aren’t allowed...(...I don’t think there would be time for them tbh in most schools but they’re not allowed either..)...not for a long time now actually...

...all the meals are freshly cooked on the premises at that school, it says so...and they’re very proud of that and their 3 choice many...which apparently now runs to 4 choices...bread and butter and a piece of fruit being the 4th choice...


...if they were key stage 1 children they would be entitled to free school meals...so they’re older children who would have had a full afternoon of work...(fortunately no SATS this year..)....with their bit of bread and butter to sustain them ...

how is eating bread and butter and an apple punishment. Its a little less than they may have got but they are not going to starve


Its a rule that EVERY parent subscribes to when they send their kids to school, no different from any other.

YOu can bet this silly women is happy to impose rules of her elderly residents at her care home. I would wager she would not give a flying f if a old women had bread and butter and an apple for lunch.

Even if they cook on the premises a company will be supplying the ingredients and the amount of ingredients, I remember the cook worrying about giving out too much grated cheese on jacket potatoes as they got a delivery on a Monday and that was it for the week

Yup this excuse is used at ours too. So the meals are balanced with exactly the right amount of nutrients and such too (though quite what fulfils all protein and such requirements when the choice is jacket potato with cheese and sugary crap, or turkey dinosaurs and chipd and beans with sugary crap..I don't know :laugh: ). And if my kids have something they don't like one day (they have to pick the options 3 weeks in advance) they might possibly get another choice if someone goes off sick or something, but only IF there is a meal going spare. Otherwise they are given a piece of fruit or something.

Mind something that annoys me massively is they used to proper police lunchboxes when they were on packed lunch, not letting them eat biscuits, crisps (besides baked ones..) or anything. Sending it back with the kids as 'unhealthy'. However, every day, there is the likes of cake and custard with the school meals. And they keep sending them out with ****ing bags of haribos for 'treats' too!

It is a discussion forum, but that also means that I can discuss my opinion that people's reaction to this story is ... Grim. And sad.

...oh seriously..:laugh:..this had nothing to do with not having enough cheese or enough anything...the school were upholding their £10 rule which as stated in the rule will ‘deny’ a child...since when was denial an adequate and a balanced meal...it just isn’t because it wasn’t meant to be, the school had decided that their punishment would be wit( the child and not with the parent ...for something the parent did..or didn’t do in this case...a very admirable rule to put in place which really showed those children....pfffft....

...the meals are not so carefully controlled that a couple more could not have been accommodated so those two children felt they were being treated the same as every other child....

they learned a valuable lesson that day

pay your debts and dont be LAZY

:clap1:

But they weren’t their debts, so the lesson they’ve really learned is, it’s okay to punish someone for someone else’s wrong doing, not a very good lesson for a school is it?

their family. they learned that family is famly and they are part of it

aslo that there mum was lazy and a liar to boot


every day is a school day

:spin2:

Thats not quite what the head said though :laugh: Saying you have a rule for when parents owe money, does not equate punishing kids for the parent being an irresponsible twat. Not in my eyes anyway.

I have never worked in a school dinner hall so have no experience of it, so can only go on what my kids schools say when they explain the lunches. And thats that the kids on dinners (paid or free) put their orders in. Orders are prepared elsewhere and stored. They given in premade trays. The school do not have spare trays, except when a kid leaves school ill in the morning or something. Hell, we have had issues before where even though the forms were filled out for orders 3 weeks back, the school actually 'order them' properly on the day (like, they give a list beforehand so the ingredients and such are there, but the actual food order goes in after morning marks apparently, for paid meals..the free ones are ordered regardless, and as such a kid who had ordered a free meal and was off, their meal would be going spare on that day), so when Skye has been late for various reasons, we have been told to send her with a packed lunch that day as orders have gone in already and there may be nothing for her. Fairly sure if I pushed they would manage to sort something, but I have never tried. But they also do not charge you for that day, obviously.

It all seems so stupid, and just totally backwards. But I can well see if that school is anything like theirs, that there will not be much spare, if any spare. They get in the amount of orders they put in. Sometimes have some flexibility if free meals have been ordered and not eaten though. But theres been a few times that Skyes not liked what she had, and they had nothing to replace it with. They do give her extra fruit in those cases though, as fruit is just in the school and not ordered daily obviously :laugh:

Also, the school does not have any provisions in place at all for parents who do not pay. But they don't do 'accounts' or whatever like this school must if they have to deal with debt often. Needs paid for at the start of the week/day, and if not, packed lunches must be brought. There is not even a grace day for mistakes, a few times Gavin has took the kids to school and forgot his wallet and had to walk back along to pay for meals! :laugh: he proper rages, and yes, again, it IS stupid.

It genuinely makes no sense to me, that the orders must be done 3 weeks in advance, yet they seem to not be able to handle the odd lateness due to the way ordering actually works?! But a lot of things about how schools are ran make no sense to me

Of course, whichever school you work in may be different. But ours really are very very strictly controlled, and made offsite (which is possibly part of the problem with how controlled they are. If it was older way like making a bunch of stuff in the school kitchens then doling it out then of course it would be different). Have no reason to lie about this and fairly sure I have brought it up on here before too :shrug:

OK this might be where we are at an impasse..as I cannot see this anywhere on the story and am assuming the school could be like the silly stinginess and lack of margin of error I see at my kids school.

If they actually are done there, then yeah there would likely be spare. There still does need to be a cutoff point for parents taking the pee though, probably higher than a tenner, but how far should it be able to climb before they can say enough is enough? or can they never say that as stopping parents from taking the piss is punishing kids?

Edit. I do see a statement about 'freshly cooked lunches' however, this is phrasing used at ours too..because technically it is freshly cooked as its done just before dinner time, just them moved to the school and kept warm til its given out.

and one imagines this isnt the first time this has heppened with this lady and after a long while they decided with heavy heart that they had to do something...


imo

Well. We don't know that but honestly, its likely. Tends to be the same ones who take the piss and have been the reason for stuff like that being rules in the first place. if people did not take advantage, then the school wouldn't need to have blanket rules in the first place. Kind of like how our school did used to take kids who hadn't paid on trips if there were only a couple of them, but obviously this led to those same few parents just never paying because they knew they could get away with it, and so, a rule came in where if the money was not there, no go, no excuses, even if it was a first time, and the parent had contacted saying they would pay when picking the kid up or something just they had forgot. (this was at my school, like 20 years back now! Not even sure they are allowed to charge for trips anymore as we only ever tend to get 'suggested donation' letters?)

'Ms Dakin said she did not realise she owed the money because her sons had ordered dinners as well as taking a packed lunch before the Easter holidays.'

I actually do not understand that excuse? How could the kids have ordered dinners and took a packed lunch without her knowing? And for it to be over a tenner, this must have happened twice too?

As Ammi suggested earlier, I wouldn't be opposed to all schoolkids getting free meals tbh, would certainly save a lot of hassle. No idea where the funding would come from though.

...it’s not quite what the head said, it’s exactly what the head said, Vicky...

The headteacher said the 'bread and butter' rule was brought in so that children are denied a school lunch whenever a family owes more than £10


...the children are denied whenever the family owes...a debt to the school is not a family debt, it’s a parental debt only... and those are the head’s own words..that the children will be punished/will be denied because of a parental error or debt...

I feel sorry for the kids they shouldn't have suffered due to the mother or the school IMO

What happened to the lovely jolly dinner ladies from years ago though?

The Dinner ladies at our primary would never have allowed a kid to go hungry, regardless of what the school said.

they got a meal deal out of it so they probbly could not give a flying hoot

:laugh::laugh: I was just thinking who is that ?:laugh:

Bread and butter though? That's stingy as hell

Honestly the idea that it's acceptable for a school of all places to single out, shame and punish CHILDREN for the mistakes of their parent is so totally alien to me that I don't even know where to start. And the "I'm sure they'll survive" quips are shortsighted, too. Kids are cruel and have long memories and these kids could easily be laughed at literally for the rest of their time in school for being "the bread and butter kids". It's nothing even close to being acceptable.

That all went out the window when schools became acadamies