Darlings going crazy on bus

MadsL

There is a difference between planned and unplanned absence. Fair enough, send a note for Johnny in bed with a cold. Perfectly well Johnny hopping on a bus to the Ploughing should be notified ahead of time - I would have thought Principals should have the right to suspend anyone not informing the school of a planned absence?

Strikes me teenagers are taking nice advantage of schools putting the responsibility on parents and parents looking the other way as "It's all organised Dad"

Schools should be saying loud "We will not tolerate illegal activity, and that includes underage drinking"

A fatality could have resulted from this incident.

Miss Lockhart

Boombastic wrote: »

How many parents would let their children go on such a trip after warnings, not enough to fill a bus is my guess. What do you think?

I know from experience that a bus full of children would most certainly be allowed go, despite such "warnings". (what is the warning? the school cannot intervene if the parents allow it).

Run_to_da_hills

If this happened on a Bus Eireann double decker the culprits would have been caught on CCTV. Each bus has four HD cams on the lower deck and three on the upper.

It would be difficult for the company to prove anything without CCTV images and DNA from pi*s samples.

Janedoe10

Bobsammy wrote: »

Boombastic wrote: »

Suspend the students

But you can't suspend students for being absent from school with parental permission.

I thought at the very least the parents should be responsible and there to answer why will little tommy and little larry and all x of their comrades will be missing on day x , and if there isn't prior arrangement that calls are made when teacher Betty x turns up at school room 12 and there is no one there .

Does she say Yaaah - parrrrty I have a free hour . Ok I'm exaggerating here but u get what I mean .

It does not wash that the school can say that they have no sense of responsibility .
As the report says the little darlings were brought back to school for their parents to be contacted .
There should NOT be a situation that the kids and their parents think that they can take off school when they like .

My attitude is if kids are contracted to be at school for the number if months - then they are under the schools juristiction .

Oh ya more I think of it me school also had a curfew . It was the schools way to control anti social behaviour - they were big asks and BOTH parents and teachers signed up for it .

@ what the little mites are up to ,

Miss Lockhart

MadsL wrote: »

I would have thought Principals should have the right to suspend anyone not informing the school of a planned absence?

They do not have that right if the planned absence is permitted by the parent.

Boombastic

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

I know from experience that a bus full of children would most certainly be allowed go, despite such "warnings". (what is the warning? the school cannot intervene if the parents allow it).

The warning is

If little johnny tells you he is going on a school trip, he is not., There is no such trip sanctioned by the school. There will be no adult supervision and in previous years the children all had a big p1ss up. All absences for the ploughing match must be arranged in advance between the parents and the principal.

Boombastic

TossL1916 wrote: »

I,ll take it that your not a culchie?
Anyway, schools do notice pupils being absent but the schools have no means of finding out whether the pupils are going with their responsible parents or with their friends on an unsupervised bus. Schools are well aware that its an annual event but they cant know for sure whether pupils are going with their parents or not. Its very common ( and very acceptable ) for a student to miss a day to go to the ploughing. Getting locked on an unsupervised bus was a celtic tiger invention and so the problem is only really being highlighted now.

Some parents probably dont know whats going on on these buses. others probably couldnt give a feck

Have they never heard of a telephone?

Miss Lockhart

Boombastic wrote: »

The warning is

If little johnny tells you he is going on a school trip, he is not., There is no such trip sanctioned by the school. There will be no adult supervision and in previous years the children all had a big p1ss up. All absences for the ploughing match must be arranged in advance between the parents and the principal.

And when little johnny is absent without prior arrangement and the principal phones home to be told that, actually, little johnny is at the ploughing - what is the principal to do?

The fact is he can do nothing other than record the absence.

Edited to add: some people seem to think parents would not allow their children go unsupervised to the ploughing - many parents do.

MadsL

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

They do not have that right if the planned absence is permitted by the parent.

Can I take my child on holidays during term time?
Taking a holiday during term time means that children miss important school time - both educationally and for other school activities. It will be difficult for them to catch up on work later on. As a result they may fall behind with school work and lose confidence in their abilities. The NEWB believes that every day counts in a child's education and strongly advises parents against taking their children out of school for holidays during term time for this reason.

No need for legislation in this regard, Principals can write this into the Code of Behaviour under Section 23 of the 2000 Act.

Code of behaviour.

23.—(1) The board of management of a recognised school shall, after consultation with the principal of, the teachers teaching at, the parents of students registered at, and the educational welfare officer assigned functions in relation to, that school, prepare, in accordance with subsection (2), a code of behaviour in respect of the students registered at the school (hereafter in this section referred to as a “code of behaviour”).

(2) A code of behaviour shall specify—

(a) the standards of behaviour that shall be observed by each student attending the school;

(b) the measures that may be taken when a student fails or refuses to observe those standards;

(c) the procedures to be followed before a student may be suspended or expelled from the school concerned;

(d) the grounds for removing a suspension imposed in relation to a student; and

(e) the procedures to be followed relating to notification of a child's absence from school.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2000/en/act/pub/0022/print.html#sec18

Failure to notify planned absence could suspend a pupil at the Principal's discretion.

Boombastic

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

And when little johnny is absent without prior arrangement and the principal phones home to be told that, actually, little johnny is at the ploughing - what is the principal to do?

The fact is he can do nothing other than record the absence.

Edited to add: some people seem to think parents would not allow their children go unsupervised to the ploughing - many parents do.

That's why the parents should have to arrange in advance with the principal, if not suspension. They were warned beforehand.

A few parents might, but not all culchie parents:)


I'm beginning to think that some teachers wouldn't notice if their hair was on fire, never mind a heap of students MIA:pac:

Miss Lockhart

MadsL wrote: »

No need for legislation in this regard, Principals can write this into the Code of Behaviour under Section 23 of the 2000 Act.

Code of behaviour.



http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2000/en/act/pub/0022/print.html#sec18

Failure to notify planned absence could suspend a pupil at the Principal's discretion.

The NEWB "strongly advises" against holidays in term time. They do not have the power to stop parents or reprimand parents or impose sanctions on the children.

The code of behaviour can include procedures and sanctions but suspension is a special sanction with very limited allowable use. At the moment parents are winning cases against schools for suspension following assault by students - they would certainly win a case for suspension for missing school due to planned absence permitted by the parent.

Schools cannot just implement any sanction they like just by writing in the behaviour code.

Miss Lockhart

Boombastic wrote: »

That's why the parents should have to arrange in advance with the principal, if not suspension. They were warned beforehand.

A few parents might, but not all culchie parents:)


I'm beginning to think that some teachers wouldn't notice if their hair was on fire, never mind a heap of students MIA:pac:

Nobody said all "culchie" (your word, not mine) parents. But I know from experience that many parents consider the ploughing to be an important traditional, social and cultural experience for their children and they will allow them go no matter what.

I'll categorise your sarcasm regarding teachers along with your use of the pathetic roll-eyes smiley.

MadsL

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

The NEWB "strongly advises" against holidays in term time. They do not have the power to stop parents or reprimand parents or impose sanctions on the children.

There code of behaviour can include procedures and sanctions but suspension is a special sanction with very limited allowable use. At the moment parents are winning cases against schools for suspension following assault by students - they would certainly win a case for suspension for missing school due to planned absence permitted by the parent.

Schools cannot just implement any sanction they like just by writing in the behaviour code.

Nope, but they can specify what sanctions can be put in place for unauthorised absence. A one liner covering "Absence to attend outside events during school time must be authorised by the Principal".

Schools seem to be a bit unwilling to tackle this it seems.

Miss Lockhart

MadsL wrote: »

Nope, but they can specify what sanctions can be put in place for unauthorised absence. A one liner covering "Absence to attend outside events during school time must be authorised by the Principal".

Schools seem to be a bit unwilling to tackle this it seems.

Schools are not at all unwilling. They send out letters advising parents of these things all the time. The simple fact is they do not have the power to impose sanctions for absence permitted by a parent. This is reality as borne out day in day out. Suspension from school is a very serious thing and there is no way the NEWB or Department would support a school in using suspension in such instances.

MadsL

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Schools are not at all unwilling. They send out letters advising parents of these things all the time. The simple fact is they do not have the power to impose sanctions for absence permitted by a parent. This is reality as borne out day in day out. Suspension from school is a very serious thing and there is no way the NEWB or Department would support a school in using suspension in such instances.

If you willingly allow your child to miss school for the Ploughing, despite school disapproval wouldn't the Board be entitled to issue a school attendance notice?

25.—(1) Subject to section 17 (2), the Board shall, if of opinion that a parent is failing or neglecting to cause his or her child to attend a recognised school in accordance with this Act, serve a notice (hereafter in this section referred to as a “school attendance notice”) on such parent—

Miss Lockhart

Schools notify the NEWB when 20 days have been missed.

In practice the NEWB don't intervene until approx 60 days are missed as they are underresourced.

That's the reality.

Parents are protected as the primary educators under our constitution and to give schools the rights which you think they already have would mean removing some of the rights of parents.

Boombastic

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Nobody said all "culchie" (your word, not mine) parents. But I know from experience that many parents consider the ploughing to be an important traditional, social and cultural experience for their children and they will allow them go no matter what.

I'll categorise your sarcasm regarding teachers along with your use of the pathetic roll-eyes smiley.

So close, but:

TossL1916 wrote: »

I,ll take it that your not a culchie?
.....................................

Press charges against those that went this year

Smoking in a workplace €3,000
If you are under 18, you cannot legally buy alcohol. Also you cannot drink it unless you are in a private residence and have permission from your parents. It is also an offence to pretend that you are over 18 in order to buy or drink alcohol. If you are found guilty of these offences, you are liable to a class E fine on summary conviction in a District Court. €500

Damage to bus -xxx?

Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994
Cannot be drunk in public place - maximum fine of €127
Cannot use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour in public -
maximum fine of €635 and/or 3 months jail




I bet nobody will be on the bus next year

Janedoe10

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

MadsL wrote: »

Nope, but they can specify what sanctions can be put in place for unauthorised absence. A one liner covering "Absence to attend outside events during school time must be authorised by the Principal".

Schools seem to be a bit unwilling to tackle this it seems.

Schools are not at all unwilling. They send out letters advising parents of these things all the time. The simple fact is they do not have the power to impose sanctions for absence permitted by a parent. This is reality as borne out day in day out. Suspension from school is a very serious thing and there is no way the NEWB or Department would support a school in using suspension in such instances.

So the school I went to which was in the country was breaking department guidelines when they suspended kids for not wearing the correct school attire .?

U would think that that was a bit extreme but they were and is still a highly regarded school with a good reputation.

It seems again that from some of these posts that some schools are afraid to follow and adher by their own guidelines or they are afraid of a "sue me" mentality. So who wins here not the school . It gets a name because said ones from "that" school wrecked a bus - the kids neither because if they are hood winking their parents , it's the start of it .

I think the ploughing champs is not the real issue . It's how easy it seen OK for kids to be left off unsupervised on a bus and drink and the parents next day blame the Bus driver without having any clue what little tommy and larry are doing ...

Miss Lockhart

Boombastic wrote: »

So close, but:





Press charges against those that went this year

Smoking in a workplace €3,000
If you are under 18, you cannot legally buy alcohol. Also you cannot drink it unless you are in a private residence and have permission from your parents. It is also an offence to pretend that you are over 18 in order to buy or drink alcohol. If you are found guilty of these offences, you are liable to a class E fine on summary conviction in a District Court. €500

Damage to bus -xxx?

Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994
Cannot be drunk in public place - maximum fine of €127
Cannot use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour in public -
maximum fine of €635 and/or 3 months jail




I bet nobody will be on the bus next year

I merely specified that I was repeating your use of the word in reply to you, to highlight that it is not a word I would choose. So your sarcasm is again unwarranted.

I agree that those involved should be prosecuted if possible. That is nothing to do with the school, but the bus company should go right ahead.

Janedoe10, rules, regulations and rights to appeal regarding suspension have changed in recent times. Suspension is a very serious matter.

Captain Darling

I'm deeply ashamed.

MadsL

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Suspension is a very serious matter.

Not nearly as serious as the criminal charges.

However, I cannot get away from the fact that I would bet my life that the school knew this trip was on the cards, and that school discipline should have come down in the first instance.

Again, include this in the list of events for which advance permission for absence is required in the code of behaviour.

It will be very interesting to see the school's response to the championships next year.

hardCopy

MadsL wrote: »

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Suspension is a very serious matter.

Not nearly as serious as the criminal charges.

However, I cannot get away from the fact that I would bet my life that the school knew this trip was on the cards, and that school discipline should have come down in the first instance.

Again, include this in the list of events for which advance permission for absence is required in the code of behaviour.

It will be very interesting to see the school's response to the championships next year.

I honestly can't see how this even relates to the school. The school had no involvement in arranging this trip and the children went with parents' consent.

Naomi00

MadsL wrote: »

Why?

Lots of people take a day off to go to the ploughing championships like that, I don't think it was an actual school trip or anything, they just organised a bus and went themselves.

meoklmrk91

I'm sorry but aren't schools under enough pressure and don't they have enough to do with out parenting these little wasters.

I would be willing to bet my life that these a middle class Celtic tiger babies, spoilt rotten and have no respect for anyone or anything. I can't believe the gall of the parents, little Fintan and Aine would never do such a thing. Left stuck in New Ross, job for them, but of course consequences as a result of their actions would never occur to these pampered, spoilt brats, just run gone to mammy with a one sided story and whinge because they are so hard done by.

They will head off to college in a few years and continue the same thing while studying for their pointless degree in ****ing arts, getting drunk, destroying other people's property and generally just getting pissed every chance they get.

It's hilarious, I went to a school for scumbags in training, supposedly, all working class, all had difficulty with mainstream school in 1 way or another, we went to a college fair and were literally treated like second class citizens. When they heard where we were coming from they could barely muster the enthusiasm to hand us a prospectus while the fell over themselves for main stream students. They go on to Universities and behave like little scrotes for 4 years and we scrimp and save to go to college of further education. We would never have done anything like that because we had some respect. But then I suppose if you have had everything handed to you then why should you work hard, or respect other people and their property when there are no consequences for your actions.

*i know that there are many students that work very hard in college regardless of your economic backround, I realise I have done a lot of generalising in this post

whatdoicare

My poor husband was not too long ago a driver for these tours- kids hired the bus going to some day out , get pissed, bring bin bags worth of drink on-all supplied by mummy and daddy, smoke on the bus, puke everywhere, damage the bus, abuse husband and generally act like sh!ts

Husband took the abuse because he had no choice- if he kicked them out his boss didn't pay him for the days work, most likely didn't offer him any work for a few days to "punish" him. (don't bother with the "but that's illegal blah blah blah", NERA were investigating the company at the time and basically said there was nothing they could do and pretty much let the boss carry on as he was)

The fella running the company doesn't care a jot if the bus is damaged, he'll patch it all back together and the bus will be on the road next day. Happens all the time, every weekend, debs, leaving cert results etc etc. It's no skin off his nose. He'll even keep the deposit fee he charges for damages.

So glad husband is away from all that, I witnessed it myself a few times, those kids were absolute animals, it was pretty frightening to be in the middle of it, watching a kid square up to a bus driver because he put his alcohol in the hold under the bus or a girl falling all over the bus in high heels while the bus in moving forcing driver to stop every five minutes.
It took us four hours to do a trip that should have taken an hour and a half, then husband had to do his best to clean up bus and go through it all again to bring them home.
More often than not they were from posh, well to do families and coming out of a very expensive private boarding school.
Hate to think what they'll be like as adults out in the world. Nasty pieces of work the whole lot if them.

meoklmrk91

whatdoicare wrote: »

My poor husband was not too long ago a driver for these tours- kids hired the bus going to some day out , get pissed, bring bin bags worth of drink on-all supplied by mummy and daddy, smoke on the bus, puke everywhere, damage the bus, abuse husband and generally act like sh!ts

Husband took the abuse because he had no choice- if he kicked them out his boss didn't pay him for the days work, most likely didn't offer him any work for a few days to "punish" him. (don't bother with the "but that's illegal blah blah blah", NERA were investigating the company at the time and basically said there was nothing they could do and pretty much let the boss carry on as he was)

The fella running the company doesn't care a jot if the bus is damaged, he'll patch it all back together and the bus will be on the road next day. Happens all the time, every weekend, debs, leaving cert results etc etc. It's no skin off his nose. He'll even keep the deposit fee he charges for damages.

So glad husband is away from all that, I witnessed it myself a few times, those kids were absolute animals, it was pretty frightening to be in the middle of it, watching a kid square up to a bus driver because he put his alcohol in the hold under the bus or a girl falling all over the bus in high heels while the bus in moving forcing driver to stop every five minutes.
It took us four hours to do a trip that should have taken an hour and a half, then husband had to do his best to clean up bus and go through it all again to bring them home.
More often than not they were from posh, well to do families and coming out of a very expensive private boarding school.
Hate to think what they'll be like as adults out in the world. Nasty pieces of work the whole lot if them.

Jesus that's terrible, your poor husband, tough is not the word for that. He must have dreaded going to work, it must have been very detrimental to his mental, emotional and general wellbeing. Anyway, good to hear he is away from it all now

whatdoicare

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

Jesus that's terrible, your poor husband, tough is not the word for that. He must have dreaded going to work, it must have been very detrimental to his mental, emotional and general wellbeing. Anyway, good to hear he is away from it all now

He's life was like a living nightmare, he used to be arguing with the kids in his sleep.
He's a whole new man now, I'd rather starve on the streets than let him go back to that job.

Galwayguy35

Infallable wrote: »

Don't underestimate today's youth! Many buses were organized purely by students with no outside help to go to the ploughing. Funnily enough, it's never the academic students that want to go, normally the so called trouble makers, who think the ploughing is the best thing from september to Christmas. No teacher in their right mind would bring students there. It was banned on my school to bring trips to the ploughing. And the schools are aware but can't do anything about it..

So what exactly are you saying here, that it's only the less academic students or trouble makers that would go to the ploughing?

If so I think that is a very unfair comment.

Many people from farming/rural backrounds make the trip most years and would bring their children with them as well for a family day out.

Are we to believe that many of these young people who are there are "troublemakers"?

I don't think so.

Boombastic

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

So what exactly are you saying here, that it's only the less academic students or trouble makers that would go to the ploughing?

If so I think that is a very unfair comment.

Many people from farming/rural backrounds make the trip most years and would bring their children with them as well for a family day out.

Are we to believe that many of these young people who are there are "troublemakers"?

I don't think so.

There is a big difference though in going with your parents and going with a bus load of fellow students

Going Forward

Infallable wrote: »

Don't underestimate today's youth! Many buses were organized purely by students with no outside help to go to the ploughing. Funnily enough, it's never the academic students that want to go, normally the so called trouble makers, who think the ploughing is the best thing from september to Christmas. No teacher in their right mind would bring students there. It was banned on my school to bring trips to the ploughing. And the schools are aware but can't do anything about it..

And no bus company in their right mind would knowingly hire a bus to a group of youths for "the Ploughing".

Unfortunately two things are at play here, one, bus companies tend to need all the work they can get at the moment, and secondly, a bus can be booked by someone sounding older than their years, and the booking is often accepted in good faith.

"The Ploughing" has become a major piss up, and muckfest social occasion for lots of thick kids, with buses being destroyed, and drivers being abused.

It is unfortunately a reflection of the general breakdown of society.

Strange how whoever is in charge of the event sees fit to allow drunken youths covered from head to toe in muck to wander around and mar such an occasion. I dont believe it happens at major agricultural events in Wales for example, at least not that I've witnessed.

And dont get me started on the amount of fireworks for sale at it.