Will the 'Affordable Uniforms' Law bite back?

Lucan Unlordly

Free Member
Feb 24, 2009
4,034
1,018
I've not been following this too closely but my understanding is that legislation has been introduced so that the cost of school uniform is reduced, in one way by allowing some purchases from supermarkets and the like.

Whilst there's an argument that it shouldn't be so, many schools make a significant profit from uniform sales - to the tune of thousands of pounds - which goes to help support financial downfalls in other areas.

On the couple of relevant pages I follow on Facebook, parents moan like hell about the prices at or about the same time they moan that the swimming pool has been out of action or that teachers weren't available to run little Johnnies after school club!

Will this be one of those laws passed with good intentions that will actually cause greater grief?
 
If there is a shortfall better for it to come into the open and allow people to judge at the ballot box who to vote for, using uniforms to cover up a shortage in funding will only keep it going.
I don't think the next election will be won or lost on the cost of school uniform? One of the teachers I spoke to once considered it to be no different than a tradesman putting a mark up on materials! I begged to differ but she went on to say that schools these days are having to demonstrate more self sufficiency than was previously the case when I attended (Cheeky Cow:D)
 
Upvote 0
So you're saying the school uniform supplier is handing over most or all of the profits to the school?

Doubt it
 
Upvote 0
So you're saying the school uniform supplier is handing over most or all of the profits to the school?

Doubt it
The school uniform provider will have an agreement with the school in order to be the sole supplier. Whether that agreement includes the school receiving a % of the sales is up to the parties. I cannot imagine that, if it did, the money would come out of the supplier's profits, but would be covered by increasing the cost of the goods. That means all parents having to pay extra for their child to attend school. That is not moral and should not be legal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bodgitt&scarperLTD
Upvote 0
ours are fine - i think the school gets a kick back from Stephensons but only blazer, jumper and tie need come from there - even the PE kit is available in the school shop (£20 for a rugby shirt and £6 for socks is fine), so i doubt it is costing parents much (there is also a thriving trade/donation of old uniform on the parents whatsapp/fb pages)

Black trousers or skirts that must not be skin tight or too short (can be bought from any supplier)
White shirts/polo shirts collared - again any supplier
Dark or white socks
Black shoes (or smart trainers without contrasting coloured logo)
Blazer £32.50-39.50
Jumper (optional) £16.50
Tie £6
Black outdoor pe shorts and white gym shorts (any supplier)

Only issue we ever had was before they allowed smart trainers when our eldest was 16 and had size 8 feet you could not get girls Clarks school shoes other than in 1 style that had soles of paper, after wearing through a pair in 2.5 weeks ! we told the school she would be walking in boots or trainers and would keep a smart pair in her school locker for lessons so could they please let her past the gate uniform inspection (or let us know where we could get shoes that met their policy), before we got an answer the policy changed
 
Upvote 0
I don't think the next election will be won or lost on the cost of school uniform? One of the teachers I spoke to once considered it to be no different than a tradesman putting a mark up on materials! I begged to differ but she went on to say that schools these days are having to demonstrate more self sufficiency than was previously the case when I attended (Cheeky Cow:D)

I never stated an election would be decided on a single issue, but it makes up an important part for some. Many on the forum might not feel the pinch as much as many, but plenty of mothers struggle with uniform costs, one reason the supermarkets got into this market with their annual offers, most selling cheaper than a small shop can even buy at.

Schools are funded by taxes, if not enough funding is available then better it is known.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maxwell83
Upvote 0
So you're saying the school uniform supplier is handing over most or all of the profits to the school?
Doubt it
No, where did you get that idea?
I said the school counts uniform sales as a revenue stream putting their own mark up on top. Although in some cases that may simply be to handle the costs of paying overtime to clerical staff to handle what is a significant logistical operation, there are many that rely on the funds raised.

Blazer £32.50-39.50
Jumper (optional) £16.50
Tie £6
Those prices look reasonable but very much dependent on quality. A half decent Blazer can be bought for as low as £11, rising to around £22 and on to £50 for non polyester flannel versions etc., so it really depends on what your getting.
Add embroidery at lets say £5 and your higher price of £39.50 could start to look quite profitable.
 
Upvote 0
I cannot imagine that, if it did, the money would come out of the supplier's profits, but would be covered by increasing the cost of the goods. That means all parents having to pay extra for their child to attend school. That is not moral and should not be legal.
Factored into the financing of the deal for Christiano Ronaldo to rejoin Manchester United is the percentage of income received from the sale of replica shirts with his name printed on the back. Better that than put ticket prices up.

It might seem immoral to raise funds through school uniform sales but if the money goes towards books or pencils?
 
Upvote 0
Factored into the financing of the deal for Christiano Ronaldo to rejoin Manchester United is the percentage of income received from the sale of replica shirts with his name printed on the back. Better that than put ticket prices up.

It might seem immoral to raise funds through school uniform sales but if the money goes towards books or pencils?
The difference being one a choice, and the other a legal requirement.

I hear you about using money raised in one aspect used to fund the true underlying issue, but personally the issue is at the heart of government pissing taxpayer funds up the wall (there's an abhorrent amount of government and public sector waste), and expecting taxpayers to fund the shortfall.

A transparent zero based budget would probably solve a lot of these issues but would prove how vastly unnecessary a large amount of public spending actually is.

Its the same as your child coming home and saying "sorry I spent my lunch money on magic beans". You still have to pay for their lunch, but now you also have unnecessary magic beans you never asked for.
 
Upvote 0
What annoyed me when we sold embroidered goods, was the fact that the sole supplier was not a open to bid for but just awarded by the head teacher with no other quote's required. which meant one large supplier supplies all the schools in the locality at high prices. the schools claimed copywrite on the logo so others not allowed to copy it

Things have not changed over the years, when i went to school in the 50-60's you still had to by a school Blaser and cap or just Blaser for girls although any other clothing was free choice. plus in the 50's they new the real meaning of poverty and the Dole
 
Upvote 0
What annoyed me when we sold embroidered goods, was the fact that the sole supplier was not a open to bid for but just awarded by the head teacher with no other quote's required. which meant one large supplier supplies all the schools in the locality at high prices. the schools claimed copywrite on the logo so others not allowed to copy it
Yes, but I think there's a strong reluctance to change from a supplier who's not let them down to one they are unsure of. The only thing worse than a woman scorned is a parent who's kids Blazer hasn't turned up in time for the new term!
 
Upvote 0
I hear you about using money raised in one aspect used to fund the true underlying issue, but personally the issue is at the heart of government pissing taxpayer funds up the wall (there's an abhorrent amount of government and public sector waste), and expecting taxpayers to fund the shortfall.

It will never change as long as the people working within the public sector, determine what happens in the public sector. We work within the sports industry where the government bodies responsible for funding, set the projects, price the projects, fund the projects and set the target outcomes for the projects. What reason do they have for making those targets unachievable? No Government has the desire for change as they thrive on positive stories no matter how they've come to be formulated.
 
Upvote 0
No, where did you get that idea?
I said the school counts uniform sales as a revenue stream putting their own mark up on top. Although in some cases that may simply be to handle the costs of paying overtime to clerical staff to handle what is a significant logistical operation, there are many that rely on the funds raised.


Those prices look reasonable but very much dependent on quality. A half decent Blazer can be bought for as low as £11, rising to around £22 and on to £50 for non polyester flannel versions etc., so it really depends on what your getting.
Add embroidery at lets say £5 and your higher price of £39.50 could start to look quite profitable.
They are polyester and prices vary with size - BUT my son had a scholarship/bursary to a private school and their blazers were £140 and only lasted the same time (they were quality wool but he just grew out of them after a couple of years) - sometimes quality is less relevant in growing children. Also they had house crests embroidered on the pocket so there was more embroidery and less options to have a secondary market (and the other rich parents didnt care)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Yes, but I think there's a strong reluctance to change from a supplier who's not let them down to one they are unsure of. The only thing worse than a woman scorned is a parent who's kids Blazer hasn't turned up in time for the new term!
At our school other than this year (covid transport related supply issues) you got 1 days grace and after that you are not allowed past the teacher at the gate if not in correct uniform and you will get marked as absent (or late if you whizz home and change)
Every year there is the same sob story in the paper about "my son/daughter got sent home and is missing education because i sent them to school in a pair of Nike/Adidas trackies costing more than a pair of Asda trousers and was surprised the school sent them home"
 
Upvote 0
I should also state - the school i went to had the oldest and therefore most exclusive uniform in the world, we had our own wardrobe that even supplied shoes and would resole/heal them as well upon presentation of a chit and I paid nothing for 7 years boarding there.
 
Upvote 0
Factored into the financing of the deal for Christiano Ronaldo to rejoin Manchester United is the percentage of income received from the sale of replica shirts with his name printed on the back. Better that than put ticket prices up.

It might seem immoral to raise funds through school uniform sales but if the money goes towards books or pencils?
If the school is so badly funded that it cvannot afford basic necessities, forcing people, some so poor that they get free school meals, to pay for thoe necessities is immoral.
 
Upvote 0
One of the local parents had a friend with an embroidery business and knocked out loads of the school logo which parents could put on Aldi/Lidl clothing. As the school didn't know who had genuine and who had copies, they were a bit stuck.
 
Upvote 0
I think the monopoly that schools had on uniforms (resulting in overpriced garments) should have never existed to begin with, and reversing that is the right thing to do.

Parents should not be paying for schools through 'hidden' means when we have been sold the model of paying for schools through public spending.

If the lack of profit from uniforms highlights a lack of proper funding for schools, then let that be exposed and let the accountable be accountable for it. How long are we supposed to simply accept inept governance and put (expensive) band aids on problems that are actually someone's job to solve?
 
Upvote 0
I think the monopoly that schools had on uniforms (resulting in overpriced garments) should have never existed to begin with, and reversing that is the right thing to do.

Parents should not be paying for schools through 'hidden' means when we have been sold the model of paying for schools through public spending.

If the lack of profit from uniforms highlights a lack of proper funding for schools, then let that be exposed and let the accountable be accountable for it. How long are we supposed to simply accept inept governance and put (expensive) band aids on problems that are actually someone's job to solve?
Your opening statement is probably right, but the school may have considered that monopoly to be necessary to maintain uniform standards?

On your last point and in response to some earlier posts. Yes, you are probably right again but if the issue today is school uniform prices, last year it was increasing the salaries for NHS workers and next month it will be improving the roads and filling pot holes. More Policemen on the street, keep the street lights on etc,., etc.,
 
Upvote 0
I should also state - the school i went to had the oldest and therefore most exclusive uniform in the world, we had our own wardrobe that even supplied shoes and would resole/heal them as well upon presentation of a chit and I paid nothing for 7 years boarding there.
Hogwarts?
 
Upvote 0
Don't we know that already?

People know taxes help fund schools. Not so many people realise that the school uniform cartels help cover up the shortfall.

A local school to myself had problems recently when it became known that school trips where money was asked for to help with the cost, were actually voluntary, many thought they were required due to the wording. It turned out the better off parents rarely contributed, the poorer ones subsidising the rich, some things never change.
 
Upvote 0

Latest Articles