My school make me pay to get phone back!

shaneoneilll

It hasn't happened to me directly as of yet but if one of the faculty of my school catches a student with their mobile phone, be it in or out of class they will take it from us, not only that but they make us pay 20 euro and have our parents come in to collect it.

Sorry if im posting in the wrong section or whatever, just move the thread if i am. I go to Secondary School and I dont use my phone in class nor has it ever been taken from me but i was outraged to hear the school say they could keep something you own from you unless you pay for it back!

I dont see myself as the perfect student but i certainly amnt rebellious but this is bull**** and my parents agree, I dont know about them but if for whatever reason i do get my phone taken, I amnt paying for it back. My phone wont get taken from me but as people have with this new "rule" I dont see it as acceptable. It wasnt in the code of conduct which each student signed when enrolling or whatever, this is just something they spurred up last week.

Could anyone give me legal advice on this? Tell me weather or not they think this fair etc. Im not looking to sxtart a fight with my school, just curios to see if people share my view.

Procrastastudy

Firstly start by reading the charter.

Next what a brilliant idea! Well done School. Hope my college lecturers don't see this I can see it being a major money spinner. We have fines for mobile use in the library already.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Trinity and DIT have a similar policy for phone use in exams

Its your choice whether to obey the school rules or not, if you refuse then you can find another school.

You would probably get a better response in one of the education forums because I don't think it is a legal issue

BTW you say that it wasn't in your schools code of conduct well most of these documents include a clause the signee obeys school rules that the school comes up with whatever they may be

MagicSean

shaneoneilll wrote: »

Could anyone give me legal advice on this? Tell me weather or not they think this fair etc. Im not looking to sxtart a fight with my school, just curios to see if people share my view.

The charter prohibits legal advice. The weather up here is rain and overcast. I think it's fair. Phones are a big distraction in school and the potential for minors to be recorded and posted on the net is just too dangerous.

lisaj

What I gather from this is that it's a deterrent to stop students from using their phones in class, so if you don't whip out your phone to text your friend across the room, then you have nothing to worry about.

In college, one particular lecturer made the person whose phone went off in class bring a box of Heroes or Celebrations for the class the next day.

When I was in secondary school (a good while ago) they had similar rules, If you were caught chewing gum in school, it was a fiver fine. Then at the end of the year, all the money went to charity. It worked.
Simple thing is just don't use your phone in school. Then you won't have any problems.

Procrastastudy

Deleted User wrote: »

When I was in secondary school (a good while ago) they had similar rules, If you were caught chewing gum in school, it was a fiver fine. Then at the end of the year, all the money went to charity. It worked.
Simple thing is just don't use your phone in school. Then you won't have any problems.

We had a new physics teacher, many many years ago! He caught people chewing gum so made them clean all the gum off the bottom of the tables in the class room. He only did this once. All the tables fell apart. Good times.

Rented Mule

Why do you need a phone in school/class ?

AlarmBelle

Procrastastudy wrote: »

We had a new physics teacher, many many years ago! He caught people chewing gum so made them clean all the gum off the bottom of the tables in the class room. He only did this once. All the tables fell apart. Good times.

had a teacher who if he saw you eating sweets would reach his grimy hand in your mouth and take the sweet out

who the fug

FFS

At school before the bleeding mobile phones came out

Smoking = £20.00 fine
Chewing Gum £ 10.00

if you had insufficient funds up at 0600 picking litter up around the school .


So as they say suck it up

Peregrinus

Yes, they can do this. Provided they are not discriminatory, violent, etc schools have a fairly wide scope to apply reasonable disciplinary measures. This can include confiscation of contraband items and/or the imposition of cash fines, and there is nothing to stop them combining the two and say that phones are contraband and will be confiscated and not returned until a cash fine is paid. Perfectly legal.

Is it fair? Well, twenty euro is not a colossal amount compared to the value of the phone, but is probably large enough to provide some deterrent against students being careless/inconsiderate with their phones. If they're introducing this half-way through the year (also perfectly legal, by the way) it's probably because they are having problems with phones or the use of phones disrupting classrooms or providing a distraction, and they feel the need to address that problem. Nothing obviously unfair there.

Avatargh

shaneoneilll wrote: »

It hasn't happened to me directly as of yet but if one of the faculty of my school catches a student with their mobile phone, be it in or out of class they will take it from us, not only that but they make us pay 20 euro and have our parents come in to collect it.

Sorry if im posting in the wrong section or whatever, just move the thread if i am. I go to Secondary School and I dont use my phone in class nor has it ever been taken from me but i was outraged to hear the school say they could keep something you own from you unless you pay for it back!

I dont see myself as the perfect student but i certainly amnt rebellious but this is bull**** and my parents agree, I dont know about them but if for whatever reason i do get my phone taken, I amnt paying for it back. My phone wont get taken from me but as people have with this new "rule" I dont see it as acceptable. It wasnt in the code of conduct which each student signed when enrolling or whatever, this is just something they spurred up last week.

Could anyone give me legal advice on this? Tell me weather or not they think this fair etc. Im not looking to sxtart a fight with my school, just curios to see if people share my view.

Do you use your phone for academic reasons? Like looking up correct spelling?

edgal

In many homework journals there are a list of rules under which the student themselves and their parents/ guardians must sign.

I remember a case whereby a more serious offence was made, and the students in question were going to be facing expulsion. However as they did not sign this they're parents were able to prevent this action from being taken by the school.
So check whether you have the above in your journal, or enrollment application etc.
If not then perhaps you could argue against confiscation and charges.

However IMO your school does not seem unreasonable or wrong in their actions.

Molloys Clondalkin

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, they can do this. Provided they are not discriminatory, violent, etc schools have a fairly wide scope to apply reasonable disciplinary measures. This can include confiscation of contraband items and/or the imposition of cash fines, and there is nothing to stop them combining the two and say that phones are contraband and will be confiscated and not returned until a cash fine is paid. Perfectly legal.

And what do you base this perfectly legal argument on?
Did I not read here recently on the clamping thread that a fine can only be issued by a court or Garda.

if some one takes your phone off you that is theft, it doesnt matter how you dress it up be it distraction or what and even then the school can not take your property and hold it for ransom/extorsion under the guise of a fine. sure they can suspend you even expell you for breaching the rules but they can not fine you or interfere with your property.

Peregrinus

It won't have escaped your notice that for a long time now schools have been detaining pupils, confiscacting contraband and (in the past) administering corporal punishment - all things which, if done in other contexts, would be serious torts or crimes or both. Don't you think if they were serious torts or crimes if done in schools, somebody would have noticed by now?

The basic legal principle at work here is that as regards discipline the school acts - and has the right to act - in loco parentis ("in the place of a parent"). This means that, basically, in circumstances where a parent could confiscate a young person's phone, a school can do so. On top of this general principle there is a statutory overlay in the Education Act 1998 and the Education (Welfare) Act 2000, which provide for fair procedures, for the publication of disciplinary policies, etc, but there is nothing in them to overturn the basic "in loco parentis" principle.

AngryHippie

I agree completely with the school on this one.
The situation down under is pretty sad on this topic at the moment:
Australians are calling for a social media monitoring group to be set up to prevent bullying/harassment etc from schools. I think a total ban on mobile devices in school is a better way to go, until such time as facebook implodes or there is proper legislation in place.
Legislation to deal with the fact that people who don't understand what libel and slander are able to post total nonsense to a world-wide audience is going to be a nightmare to draft and is a long-time away. Until then....its up to parents and teachers to try and protect themselves and their charges in any way they can.

Procrastastudy

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

And what do you base this perfectly legal argument on?
Did I not read here recently on the clamping thread that a fine can only be issued by a court or Garda.

if some one takes your phone off you that is theft, it doesnt matter how you dress it up be it distraction or what and even then the school can not take your property and hold it for ransom/extorsion under the guise of a fine. sure they can suspend you even expell you for breaching the rules but they can not fine you or interfere with your property.

Fair play for being the only one to be batting for the other side on this one but I think you've misunderstood theft and what constitutes a criminal fine v a sanction. You wouldn't be the first person but there are some detailed judgments on the subject. Can I remember one? No Should I be able to remember them? Yes

The classic example given is a couple of hundred euro as a late fee for tax. This isn't considered a fine in the criminal context that you describe.

Molloys Clondalkin

Yes its a penalty for late payment, there would be a SI with those set out yet there isnt one for schools neither of the two SI relating to education welfare that were posted earlier have any mention of a cash fine. I even abhorr the the term fine being used in this instance, Fines dont have to be criminal its the non payment of them that becomes the offence.
If the school wanted to be above the law in my eyes then when they catch a student with a phone they issue a penalty but you cant just take someones phone and deprive them of the right to use it.
Imagine this scenario a young girl has her phone taken off by the school then some evening she gets attacked she has no phone to call for help etc. No one should be put in that position.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

Yes its a penalty for late payment, there would be a SI with those set out yet there isnt one for schools neither of the two SI relating to education welfare that were posted earlier have any mention of a cash fine. I even abhorr the the term fine being used in this instance, Fines dont have to be criminal its the non payment of them that becomes the offence.
If the school wanted to be above the law in my eyes then when they catch a student with a phone they issue a penalty but you cant just take someones phone and deprive them of the right to use it.
Imagine this scenario a young girl has her phone taken off by the school then some evening she gets attacked she has no phone to call for help etc. No one should be put in that position.

The idea is to be a deterrent. If a pupil thinks that they will get their phone taken off them they are less likely to use it when they shouldn't be. It's a common punishment used by schools and is nothing new.

Sure there could be similar scenarios in which said girl forgets her phone, or her phone is broke, or she has no batter/credit, etc. I always find these kind of examples awful sensationalist

Procrastastudy

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

Yes its a penalty for late payment, there would be a SI with those set out yet there isnt one for schools neither of the two SI relating to education welfare that were posted earlier have any mention of a cash fine. I even abhorr the the term fine being used in this instance, Fines dont have to be criminal its the non payment of them that becomes the offence.
If the school wanted to be above the law in my eyes then when they catch a student with a phone they issue a penalty but you cant just take someones phone and deprive them of the right to use it.
Imagine this scenario a young girl has her phone taken off by the school then some evening she gets attacked she has no phone to call for help etc. No one should be put in that position.

To be honest when I were a lad none of us had phones and very few of us got attacked but I take your point.

Molloys Clondalkin

there were no mobiles when I was in school either, It just annoys me that theseplaces think they can legally hold your property for ransom, will we be hearing soon schools have given teachers a quota to raise cash??? same with councils fining you for having the bin lid open etc its all revenue raising!

the deterrent when i was there was detention or lines when did extorsion come in place of these? i know the example is sensasionalist but it does and will happen.

Procrastastudy

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

there were no mobiles when I was in school either, It just annoys me that theseplaces think they can legally hold your property for ransom, will we be hearing soon schools have given teachers a quota to raise cash??? same with councils fining you for having the bin lid open etc its all revenue raising!

the deterrent when i was there was detention or lines when did extorsion come in place of these? i know the example is sensasionalist but it does and will happen.

I think that's overstating it. Wasn't a DC judge rather scathing of a local council recently over a box left on a recycle bin?

I have to say though if the OP gets himself familiar with Arts 40.3 and 43 he might not get his phone back but might just get some extra credit at school.

Thinking back we didn't even have the internet - well for the first few years at least. By the time I hit later years in secondary school the market for dirty pictures printed off by the few lads that had modems was very lucrative.

I think we should paraphrase President Bartlet here and agree that we've made very few technological advances in the last thirty years, just come up with a way to disseminate gossip and pornography faster. (link actual quote appreciated)

I found it and it was Leo.

The Warfare of Genghis Khan

Leo: My generation never got the future it was promised... Thirty-five years later, cars, air travel is exactly the same. We don't even have the Concorde anymore. Technology stopped.
Josh: The personal computer...
Leo: A more efficient delivery system for gossip and pornography? Where's my jet pack, my colonies on the Moon?

OP another suggestion for you - watch 'The West Wing'. Best bit of exam procrastination I ever did.

Peregrinus

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

there were no mobiles when I was in school either, It just annoys me that theseplaces think they can legally hold your property for ransom, will we be hearing soon schools have given teachers a quota to raise cash??? same with councils fining you for having the bin lid open etc its all revenue raising!

the deterrent when i was there was detention or lines when did extorsion come in place of these? i know the example is sensasionalist but it does and will happen.

If the confiscation policy of this school is theft, then surely the detention policy that you were subjected to was false imprisonment?

Molloys Clondalkin

Touche

doolox

My last day at school. My parents would laugh at the in "in loco parentis" excuse used by teachers and other external authority figures to justify capricious cruelty and dicatorial behaviour on the part of teachers towards pupils.

Like the little girl in the nursery rhyme when teachers are good they are very very good but when they are bad they are horrid.

In my mind Detention is false imprisonment.

Confiscation is theft.

Any imposed fiscal penalties are also theft against the untilmate paymasters, the parents, and will not be met.

I am perhaps lucky that my children are regarded highly at school and have given no reason to teachers to impose penalties and I am also lucky to have wife and other relatives who are involved in education and know the ins and outs, the existance of good teachers and also the existance of utterly useless ones.

Molloys Clondalkin

Now to further the debate lets have a look at the guidelnes for sanctions
available here http://www.newb.ie/downloads/pdf/guidelines_school_codes_eng.pdf

Sanctions should be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the behaviour. Decisions about the
use of sanctions should distinguish between minor misbehaviour and serious misbehaviour. The view
taken about how serious any particular behaviour is will depend on several factors besides the actual
behaviour itself

They should be appropriate to the age and developmental stage of the student and take account of
the cultural background of the student. Sanctions should be sensitive to the particular circumstances
of vulnerable individuals or groups of students (for example, a child in care or a child with special
educational needs). In order to comply with equality legislation, sanctions must not be used in a manner that discriminates against particular students or groups of students and schools should be aware that some sanctions might impact disproportionately on particular groups.

It is for individual schools to determine what sanctions to use, drawing on professional judgement and the knowledge of the particular context of the student and the behaviour. Examples include:
verbal reprimand,removal from the group (in class)
withdrawal of privileges
withdrawal from the particular lesson or peer group
carrying out a useful task in the school
detention
formal report to the Board of Management.
If detention is used as a sanction in the school, this should be made clear in the written code of behaviour. Parents should have adequate notice of detention.

Inappropriate sanctions include:
physical punishment or the threat of physical punishment: physical chastisement of a student is illegal under section 24 of the
Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997
ridicule, sarcasm or remarks likely to undermine a student’s self confidence
public or private humiliation
applying sanctions to whole groups or classes in cases of individual or small-group wrongdoing
leaving a student in an unsupervised situation (e.g. a corridor) while in the care of the school
persistent isolation of, or ignoring, a student in class
sanctions that are used in a discriminatory way: the

Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004 require that schools
do not discriminate in the use of sanctions.
Temporarily removing a student from the classroom to a supervised location may be appropriate

No where does it say fleece the student or his family of thier hard earned money.
Also in there is legislation which protects the child.

The UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child (1989)This Convention, ratified by Ireland in 1992, provides that the State
shall ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner
consistent with the dignity of the child.


If the child came from a less well off family a sanction of paying money would deprive that
child and his/her family of thier dignity. If the student was unable to pay this "fine" would they get thier property back? or would thier right to fair process have even been considered?
which is something these blanket punishments do, ie; they dont give regard to the circumstances of the student or the vunrebilities of the student.

:cool:

Molloys Clondalkin

A person shall be guilty of the offence of false imprisonment who intentionally or recklessly—
takes or detains, or
causes to be taken or detained, or
otherwise restricts the personal liberty of,
another without that other's consent.
For the purposes of this section, a person acts without the consent of another if the person obtains the other's consent by force or threat of force, or by deception causing the other to believe that he or she is under legal compulsion to consent.
A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both, or
on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

Now Im going a bit off here but doesnt the school make you feel compulsed to stay ? pending the threat of further reprimand.

section 17 also notes
A person, other than a person to whom section 16 applies, shall be guilty of an offence who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, intentionally takes or detains a child under the age of 16 years or causes a child under that age to be so taken or detained—
so as to remove the child from the lawful control of any person having lawful control of the child; or
so as to keep him or her out of the lawful control of any person entitled to lawful control of the child
It shall be a defence to a charge under this section that the defendant believed that the child had attained the age of 16 years.

This gets interesting for me anyway, law is great

Peregrinus

But you’re overlooking the in loco parentis rule.

The questions you should ask yourself are these: If a parent “grounded” a child for misbehaviour, is that false imprisonment? If a parent confiscates something that the child is not supposed to have, or that the child is abusing or misusing, is that theft?

If the answer to these question is “no” (and, hint for the slower students, the answer is indeed “no”) then a school can do these things to. They have to do them lawfully, of course, in ways which do not infringe the education legislation.

It might be unreasonable if the school demands a payment which is disproportionate to the value of the phone, but in this case I think the fine was €20, which is plainly much less than the value of even a cheap phone. And anyone who can afford to buy and use a phone in the first place can probably work out how to earn €20 to redeem it by the end of term. The fine does have to be high enough to act as a practical disincentive.

Likewise, there has to be fair process. If the phone is confiscated for breach of rule which is only made up after the event, for instance, that’s unfair. Or if students are not able to have the teacher’s decision reviewed by, e.g., the principal or another staff member.

But, subject to these considerations, can a school lawfully adopt disciplinary measures which include confiscation of contraband and/or the imposition of fines? Yes, absolutely, no doubt about it.

Molloys Clondalkin

any help finding the in loco parentis legislation would be appreitiated

jill_valentine

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Firstly start by reading the charter.

Next what a brilliant idea! Well done School. Hope my college lecturers don't see this I can see it being a major money spinner. We have fines for mobile use in the library already.

My college lecturer used to answer his phone during classes, so I'm not sure that's altogether workable.

Peregrinus

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

any help finding the in loco parentis legislation would be appreitiated

It's not embodied in legislation; it's a common law rule. Have a look at Student A -v- Dublin Secondary School [1999] IEHC 47 (HC 25 November 1999), which cites Fitzgerald -v- Northcote [1865] 4 F&F 656 and Mansell -v- Griffin [1908] 1 KB 160. The actual facts in Student A deal with an expulsion, but it contains a discussion of the general rules governing school disciplinary procedures and sanctions.

Procrastastudy

jill_valentine wrote: »

My college lecturer used to answer his phone during classes, so I'm not sure that's altogether workable.

A tad unprofessional...

Conor556

That is just shows how bone ****ing idle some of the teachers or the principal are in your school to think up of something so ****ing stupid, i have 2 phones if I get caught using the good 1 i put it back in my pocket and take out a ****ty 1 with no sim or anything, get it back after a week. (only happened once)

Curly Judge

shaneoneilll wrote: »

It hasn't happened to me directly as of yet but if one of the faculty of my school catches a student with their mobile phone, be it in or out of class they will take it from us, not only that but they make us pay 20 euro and have our parents come in to collect it.

Sorry if im posting in the wrong section or whatever, just move the thread if i am. I go to Secondary School and I dont use my phone in class nor has it ever been taken from me but i was outraged to hear the school say they could keep something you own from you unless you pay for it back!

I dont see myself as the perfect student but i certainly amnt rebellious but this is bull**** and my parents agree, I dont know about them but if for whatever reason i do get my phone taken, I amnt paying for it back. My phone wont get taken from me but as people have with this new "rule" I dont see it as acceptable. It wasnt in the code of conduct which each student signed when enrolling or whatever, this is just something they spurred up last week.

Could anyone give me legal advice on this? Tell me weather or not they think this fair etc. Im not looking to sxtart a fight with my school, just curios to see if people share my view.

A few suggestions :
Take your business to a school where bolshie students and their silly parents will be tolerated.
Start a local branch of the anarchist movement and lobby for schools where pupils can do as they please.
Put some extra effort into learning spelling and grammar.

jill_valentine

Procrastastudy wrote: »

A tad unprofessional...

To put it mildly. And not in a "Hang on, I'll call you back" kind of way, like he'd have his full conversation up there with the whole hall looking on.

On more than one occasion, the call was to ask him to move his car for whatever reason, and then he'd duly walk out of the lecture to do exactly that.

DIT ftw?

MagicSean

Conor556 wrote: »

That is just shows how bone ****ing idle some of the teachers or the principal are in your school to think up of something so ****ing stupid, i have 2 phones if I get caught using the good 1 i put it back in my pocket and take out a ****ty 1 with no sim or anything, get it back after a week. (only happened once)

Wow. You're so cool.

looksee

Ah, aren't they cute, all these little baby lawyers. And little baby grammar and spelling too, but we'll not dwell on that.

These are the ones that, as you look from the front of the class, have the top of a head showing as they busily text under the desk. If using a phone in class is so cool and ok, why do it under the desk?

The same ones that, when you ask them at the end of an explanation what they understand they are to do, look confused and say 'wha'?' And then expect it to be explained all over again.

Could we have an intelligent and considered alternative solution to preventing phone use in class from some of these experts?

And no, you do not need mobile phones for checking spellings, you can get this thing made of printed paper, its called a Dictionary, and it works just as well.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Conor556 wrote: »

That is just shows how bone ****ing idle some of the teachers or the principal are in your school to think up of something so ****ing stupid, i have 2 phones if I get caught using the good 1 i put it back in my pocket and take out a ****ty 1 with no sim or anything, get it back after a week. (only happened once)

Some rebel...

SunDog

who the fug wrote: »

FFS

At school before the bleeding mobile phones came out

Smoking = £20.00 fine
Chewing Gum £ 10.00

if you had insufficient funds up at 0600 picking litter up around the school .


So as they say suck it up

Think we may have gone to the same school.

who the fug

SunDog wrote: »

Think we may have gone to the same school.

Were one bunked off mass on Sunday to sit in the rain in Tir na Og

Molloys Clondalkin

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's not embodied in legislation; it's a common law rule. Have a look at Student A -v- Dublin Secondary School [1999] IEHC 47 (HC 25 November 1999), which cites Fitzgerald -v- Northcote [1865] 4 F&F 656 and Mansell -v- Griffin [1908] 1 KB 160. The actual facts in Student A deal with an expulsion, but it contains a discussion of the general rules governing school disciplinary procedures and sanctions.

Ill try and find it to have a look cheers for the info.

Procrastastudy

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

Ill try and find it to have a look cheers for the info.

www.bailii.org

Conor556

MagicSean wrote: »

Wow. You're so cool.

Naa its not that at all you **** its something plenty of people do, your probably one of the people that if it happened to you would have mammy in to sort it out for ya!

Procrastastudy

Conor556 wrote: »

Naa its not that at all you **** its something plenty of people do, your probably one of the people that if it happened to you would have mammy in to sort it out for ya!

*you're

MagicSean

Conor556 wrote: »

Naa its not that at all you **** its something plenty of people do, your probably one of the people that if it happened to you would have mammy in to sort it out for ya!

Ouch. Anonymous internet insult from a child. My one weakness. How will I recover from that assault on my character?

Procrastastudy

MagicSean wrote: »

Ouch. Anonymous internet insult from a child. My one weakness. How will I recover from that assault on my character?

Did they even have mobiles when you were as school MagicSean?

SunDog

who the fug wrote: »

Were one bunked off mass on Sunday to sit in the rain in Tir na Og

Fecker always noticed when I wasn't there