Can I Have The Skin Please?

The other day my grandson was telling me what he had for school dinner and I asked him what he had for 'afters'. 'Cake and custard' he replied. 'I thought you didn't like custard' I said. 'Well I do now' he told me 'but I don't like the skin'. Which reminded me of the school dinner times when 'Can I have the skin please' was heard several times a week. If I ever write a book about my years working in a primary school 'Can I Have The Skin Please' will be on my list of possible book titles.

Last week saw the end of a fairly long running dispute between a school and one of its employees. Carol Hill was sacked after reporting an incident of bullying to the victims parents.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/school-dinner-lady-unfairly-sacked

The headteacher strongly denies the incident was bullying but rather a game that got out of hand. The school's head, Deborah Crabb, said four boys involved had explained that they were playing a game called "prisoners and guards". The incident was not bullying but an "inappropriate game" which went too far, she argued during the three-day hearing.

'Prisoners and Guards' is a new one on me. Cops and Robbers, Batman and Robin, Doctors and Nurses, and in fact any game involving special powers are the main staples of playgrounds up and down the country. But 'prisoner and guards'? What next? 'torturers and tortured'? I am not suggesting that there is any hint of torture in a prison guards job description but the use of a rope and rails (and lookouts posted) suggests that these young boys were interested in exerting power. Headteachers are under a lot of pressure to deal with incidents of bullying and quite rightly so. But because a school is judged on the number of bullying incidents it reports some bullying incidents are in danger of being attributed to normal playground high jinks.

I hate it when any and every incident is described as bullying but the parents of this young girl were entitled to be told the truth. Even it the truth was her injuries were the result of a game that got out of hand. Instead Ms Crabb sent a letter to the girl's parents saying: "You may wish to know [the girl] had a minor accident today. She was hurt on the right leg and right wrist with a skipping rope." Not a good move. A game that got out of hand is not an accident. As a parent I would mistrust this woman immediately.

Yet Mrs Hill in my opinion fares no better. No offence to Mrs Hill but she comes across as the typical 'old school' dinner lady. Someone who thinks they know better than some upstart of a headteacher. Mrs Hill wants her job back which indicates she has a pretty thick skin, also common among old school dinner ladies.
A joint statement from the county council and Great Tey Primary School said: “It is completely inaccurate to suggest that Mrs Hill has won her claim for unfair dismissal.
'Furthermore there has been no judgement on the fairness, or not, of the dismissal and the tribunal makes it clear there is need for further representation from both counsels to decide this point. “On a number of critical points the employment tribunal ruling has found against Mrs Hill including that she was not acting in good faith when speaking to the press and did so for the purpose of personal gain. “The claimant’s predominant motive was self-interest and to a lesser extent antagonism towards Mrs Crabb. “The tribunal also ruled that disclosures were not protected under the Employment Rights Act therefore she was not acting as a whistleblower. The council and school will now be considering all the options before making any further decisions or announcements.”
It would seem that both Mrs Hill and Ms Crabb are victims of bureaucracy. But Ms Crabb - as the headteacher and person in authority and thus someone who could have handled the situation in a way that would have not escalated the situation  - you could do better!

In these days of cut it is interesting to see that a Labour council are going ahead with their election promise of free school meals for every child, regardless of need.

http://www.southwarklabour.co.uk/labour-pledge-free-school-meals

http://www.progressonline.org.uk/articles/article.asp?a=5400

Critics have said that this policy will only benefit middle class families. But advocates of the scheme say that it will benefit the poorest families by removing the stigma attached to receiving free school meals. The concern for me is which services will be cut in order to pay for this? Meals of Wheels? Nursery Provision? After School Clubs? The money has to come from somewhere and given the most needy already receive free school meals you have to wonder how this benefits the poorest families. Because it is they,  and not the middle classes, who will be the ones who will feel the knock on effect of robbing Peter to pay Paul. But - it is nice to see an election promise being kept!