No book Grant this year

JONJO THE MISER · 25-08-2009 06:26PM #1

Just heard there on the news that the goverment canceld the book grant to poor families this year:mad:, how are families who were made unemployed supposed to buy books for there kids, it might be okay if you could get 2nd hand books but most books are replaced by new additions every year, Just one big scam by the book companies and the department of Education, screw this goverment when they can help poor families, parents who cant afford the books should not buy them and send there kids to school without books, people need to take a stand against the goverment and book companies.

54kroc · 25-08-2009 06:28PM

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

how are families who were made unemployed supposed to buy books for there kids

Save up like everyone else.

derby7 · 25-08-2009 06:28PM

........and we have Cowen The Miser (& his cronies) to thank !
/he's no relation of yours is he ? (:pac:)

sunnyside · 25-08-2009 06:31PM

They still have the childrens allowance. Can't they use that to pay for the books.

phasers · 25-08-2009 06:50PM

Maybe the Children's allowance is being used to pay bills or paying for the stupid overpriced uniform secondary school students have to get.

It is a shame, and especially hard if parents have two or three children starting secondary school or going into fifth year.

Another thing that could really save money - Secondary school uniforms need to be more non-descript.

A plain skirt or trousers and a plain jumper would cost 30 or 40 quid in a regular shop, where as at the moment a uniform can run up to €200 (At least mine did, with it's stupid tartan kilt), or more, as some schools have unique tracksuits as well.

Gummy Panda · 25-08-2009 06:51PM

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Just heard there on the news that the goverment canceld the book grant to poor families this year:mad:, how are families who were made unemployed supposed to buy books for there kids, it might be okay if you could get 2nd hand books but most books are replaced by new additions every year, Just one big scam by the book companies and the department of Education, screw this goverment when they can help poor families, parents who cant afford the books should not buy them and send there kids to school without books, people need to take a stand against the goverment and book companies.

Can't schools run a book rental scheme?

My primary school and secondary school did. They bought the books in bulk and rented them out for the year as they would most likely be needed for the following years.

I know other secondary schools do book sales for students to sell their old books as well.

mikom · 25-08-2009 07:08PM

Knowledge economy, Knowledge economy, yadda , yadd, yadda.

ShooterSF · 25-08-2009 07:13PM

Children Allowance and a rental scheme surely.

Biggins · 25-08-2009 07:16PM

sunnyside wrote: »

They still have the childrens allowance this month!

Corrected that.

Cuts, cuts. A lot of them understandable but some are just hitting in the wrong areas completely.
See the bottom link in my sig!

25-08-2009 07:19PM

Maybe now people will think twice before having more kids than they can afford to maintain.

phasers · 25-08-2009 07:21PM

00112984 wrote: »

Maybe now people will think twice before having more kids than they can afford to maintain.

This is a very stupid statement. What if a family's circumstances only recently changed? Maybe a parent was made redundant, after having paid tax all their lives.

25-08-2009 07:24PM

phasers wrote: »

This is a very stupid statement. What if a family's circumstances only recently changed? Maybe a parent was made redundant, after having paid tax all their lives.

Oh yes, nothing like an unexpected expense to contend with. Every September. :rolleyes:

ShooterSF · 25-08-2009 07:26PM

phasers wrote: »

This is a very stupid statement. What if a family's circumstances only recently changed? Maybe a parent was made redundant, after having paid tax all their lives.

Surely a person paying taxes all their life had some level of savings to buy some school books and again will have being getting children's allowance while they were working. Sorry but this one area I have no compassion for. They already get an allowance.

phasers · 25-08-2009 07:35PM

00112984 wrote: »

Oh yes, nothing like an unexpected expense to contend with. Every September. :rolleyes:

I'm not talking about every year, I'm talking about somebody in a job with quite low pay who was made redundant.

Anyway, regardless of what you think of these people or what circumstances they're in, why should children suffer for having poor parents?

25-08-2009 07:39PM

phasers wrote: »

I'm not talking about every year, I'm talking about somebody in a job with quite low pay who was made redundant.

Anyway, regardless of what you think of these people or what circumstances they're in, why should children suffer for having poor parents?

Why should tax payers?

A tax payer in this country (including those with no children) pays tax that contributes to maternity leave payments, public maternity hospitals, costs of building schools, teachers' wages (even in private schools), child benefit, secondary school exam costs and loads more. The buck has to stop somewhere and anyone, regardless of their employment/economic situation who has children in school should prioritise the purchase of those books and stop relying on getting a "grant".

Biggins · 25-08-2009 07:45PM

00112984 wrote: »

Maybe now people will think twice before having more kids than they can afford to maintain.

Its not as simple as that. Never is.

The cost of rearing children has rocketed due to prices such as the books not being kept within real every day street competition prices.
There is no competition, the education book companies have a monopoly to a great extent, do they not?
Its either you "buy this book" or your child goes without. No alternatives are allowed from rival book companies producing the same books in most cases!

If you walk into a bar, ask for a pint and your not happy with the price, you can walk out in refusal.
Parents can't do that - its either buy it or not (and your kids suffer).

Also telling parents to cut down on having kids is not a long term solution.
EVEN the Chinese found that out. They are now slowly trying to reverse the "One child per family" policy they themselves brought in.
They discovered (when they looked at the future finance evaluations) that at that rate, eventually there would not be enough (now) children - future adults to earn a living and pay back to the state in taxes etc, to further uphold the economy with revenue returned back from their future earnings.

I agree that we can't be paying out for everything but maybe the book system, the monopoly some book companies have and the price fixing, should be seriously investigated and something done!

Wertz · 25-08-2009 07:46PM

I'm sure Folens and the rest of the cartel are filing for bankruptcy as we speak.

Oh wait, no they aren't. Business as usual again this year.
A state sponsored scam if ever there was...

This whole workbook phenomenon for national and secondary school pupils is shambolic as is the insistence on changing/re-writing textbooks every few years for the sake of the curriculum.

The schoolbook market is strange...the person buying the book(s) has no choice over what they buy and the people with the choice (those that set the curriculum) have no concern about the price. Hence the ability to overcharge with impunity.

Trampas · 25-08-2009 07:52PM

phasers wrote: »

Maybe the Children's allowance is being used to pay bills or paying for the stupid overpriced uniform secondary school students have to get.

Imagine if there was no uniform. It would be worse cause little Johnny is wearing the latest runners and football jersey. why can't i have it.

Uniforms are a good thing for schools.

Why don't you ask the school about bringing in a book rental scheme

Daysha · 25-08-2009 08:01PM

I work in a school book shop every summer, and you won't believe the amount of "revisions" some of those publishers and authors make to the books, but the schools have to take a share of the blame too.

I had one customer last September just after school started who came in with the 2nd edition of a Biology book given to them second hand. She assumed it would be ok, but she was told by the school it specifically had to be the new, 3rd edition of the book (the 3rd edition in 4/5 years iirc). Forked out €35.95 for the new one which after a bit of comparision has, at best, 4-5% of a difference to the old one.

Granted, there was no need for the publishers to revise the books (there only should be when there's a curriculum change), but why do some school find it so important to make sure every student has the same up to date book? I'm telling you now, the difference the 3rd edition book will make to the students grades compared to what she'd get using the 2nd edition is absolutely minimal.

It's slightly dispairing seeing the faces on some parents when they come in with their book lists at times. Another customer there last month came to me with 4 lists; 4th class, two 1st years and a 5th year. Grand total of €735. In fact, considering many parents fork out €300 p/student going into 1st year, I was surprised the total didn't break 800.

It's hard not to feel a bit squimish taking that amount of money from them, especially when you tell which ones are finding it harder than others. Some will have their kids on their backs wanting this type of schoolbag or that type of pencil case, it's something I don't envy them going through one bit.

phic · 25-08-2009 08:08PM

I work in a school book shop too, and I agree with Daysha, its very tough sometimes having to be the face thats grossly overcharging people who really can't afford it, or telling people the new book last year has been "updated" again. They rarely understand, that its the book companies that are profiting and I'm actually on less than minimum wage!
On topic, just wanted to say maybe they're cutting back on grants, but they are definitly still giving them, I've been paid in school grant cheques a few times today even.

25-08-2009 08:11PM

Screw that, my family wasn't poor but there wasn't exactly lots of money to spare and a lot of my books were hand-me-downs. New editions? I never had much of a problem. Sure half my leaving cert study books were 2 years old.

Wertz · 25-08-2009 08:14PM

Trampas wrote: »

Imagine if there was no uniform. It would be worse cause little Johnny is wearing the latest runners and football jersey. why can't i have it.

Uniforms are a good thing for schools.

So how do overpriced proprietary uniforms with intricate school crests help anyone?
Why isn't it national policy to have cheap widely available clothing in use as uniforms? Uniforms should comply to the lowest common denominator and level the playing field fairly...ie. cost should not be an issue to anyone.

We all know why schools have uniforms...but no-one sems to be able to tell anyone why a school jumper or school skirt or whatever article of clothing costs more than a no-name equivalent.

Good post Daysha.

phic · 25-08-2009 08:18PM

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Screw that, my family wasn't poor but there wasn't exactly lots of money to spare and a lot of my books were hand-me-downs. New editions? I never had much of a problem. Sure half my leaving cert study books were 2 years old.

well I've seen plenty of people this year who can't pass on a single book to a child going into first year, when an older one just finished third year. maybe you were just very lucky.

phasers · 25-08-2009 08:21PM

Trampas wrote: »

Imagine if there was no uniform. It would be worse cause little Johnny is wearing the latest runners and football jersey. why can't i have it.

Uniforms are a good thing for schools.

Why don't you ask the school about bringing in a book rental scheme

I definitely agree about uniforms being a good thing, but I don't agree with them costing what they do.

Wagon · 25-08-2009 08:24PM

I don't like this. Books are way overpriced. So are uniforms. Why are there uniforms in the first place? They don't help students in any way.

Wertz · 25-08-2009 08:27PM

phic wrote: »

maybe you were just very lucky.

I'd say it's to do with age...back when I was at school hand me downs and secondhand was the norm, unless there was a re-issue...Folens and the like seem to have realised that if you don't change it up every few years your market becomes saturated with used books, thus hitting your annual turnover...hence the move to do re-writes/re-issues every few years and the move toward workbooks which are a yearly purchase and can't be passed on...
All aided and abetted by the high ups in the dept of edumacation...

yurmothrintites · 25-08-2009 08:29PM

Wertz wrote: »

So how do overpriced proprietary uniforms with intricate school crests help anyone?
Why isn't it national policy to have cheap widely available clothing in use as uniforms? Uniforms should comply to the lowest common denominator and level the playing field fairly...ie. cost should not be an issue to anyone.

We all know why schools have uniforms...but no-one sems to be able to tell anyone why a school jumper or school skirt or whatever article of clothing costs more than a no-name equivalent.

Good post Daysha.

I work in a uniform shop and I completely disagree with what you're saying. The difference between a good quality jumper and say one from Dunnes Stores is enormous. It pays to have a proper jumper as the better quality ones last much longer and wear very well. If a school jumper didn't have a crest then any uniforms from chainstores would be bought and the comparison between cheap uniforms and more expensive ones would be very apparent thus creating a division between parents who can afford good uniforms and parents who cannot.

It's not a National Policy that is needed, schools need to be approached on prices and compulsary items of clothing as it is their call on what should be deemed as a uniform.

Most uniforms are not overpriced. For articles of clothing worn over 150 days of the year, I think they are resonable. Saying that, there are many shops that are exploiting the fact that they may be the sole provider of a school's uniform in a town and therefore charging an abnormal amount for the clothes. So I can see what you're saying in that sense.

See it like this if you will. If you buy a cotton school jumper from a supermarket for a child's day to day wear, it may last until christmas without major deteriation. Buy a decent woolmix one and it will last at least a year, possibly two.

phic · 25-08-2009 08:36PM

Wertz wrote: »

I'd say it's to do with age...back when I was at school hand me downs and secondhand was the norm, unless there was a re-issue...Folens and the like seem to have realised that if you don't change it up every few years your market becomes saturated with used books, thus hitting your annual turnover...hence the move to do re-writes/re-issues every few years and the move toward workbooks which are a yearly purchase and can't be passed on...
All aided and abetted by the high ups in the dept of edumacation...

yeah thats true, their seem to be less and less secondhands available every year!
Really though schoolbook publishers are a business, so can you really blame them for trying to increase profits? If there was just one textbook per subject published by the dep. of education it would be better IMO.

Wertz · 25-08-2009 08:37PM

Since you work in a unifrom shop obviously you're going to disagree with what I'm saying. Your job depends somewhat on the continued high prices and limited availability.

I agree with you as regards quality clothing...but what you don't seem to get is that there are parents out there who find it a struggle to supply such a uniform plus a spare...then you have the issue of pupils wearing through those uniforms through play or even through simple growth.
Requiring a parent to have to supply a specific uniform or article thereof perhaps twice during the year is wrong...it takes food off the table, maybe denies a sibling of something they need, whatever.

Being able to buy an acrylic mix pullover and matching pants in Tesco for 20 quid and thusly being able to supply a spare AND being able to replace ity during the year would be much more favourable from the parent's perspective...although obviously not from the uniform shop's point of view.

phasers · 25-08-2009 08:41PM

yurmothrintites wrote: »

I work in a uniform shop and I completely disagree with what you're saying. The difference between a good quality jumper and say one from Dunnes Stores is enormous. It pays to have a proper jumper as the better quality ones last much longer and wear very well. If a school jumper didn't have a crest then any uniforms from chainstores would be bought and the comparison between cheap uniforms and more expensive ones would be very apparent thus creating a division between parents who can afford good uniforms and parents who cannot.

It's not a National Policy that is needed, schools need to be approached on prices and compulsary items of clothing as it is their call on what should be deemed as a uniform.

Most uniforms are not overpriced. For articles of clothing worn over 150 days of the year, I think they are resonable. Saying that, there are many shops that are exploiting the fact that they may be the sole provider of a school's uniform in a town and therefore charging an abnormal amount for the clothes. So I can see what you're saying in that sense.

See it like this if you will. If you buy a cotton school jumper from a supermarket for a child's day to day wear, it may last until christmas without major deteriation. Buy a decent woolmix one and it will last at least a year, possibly two.

I've just left school this year, and I can tell you that the quality of most, if not all, school jumpers is not that great. Obviously it's slightly better than a shop bought one, but not good enough to justify the ridiculous price. In my school at least, the jumper cost €60 and the elbows wore out by christmas, and the cuffs always opened and got ruined. Same deal with the kilt, 60 euro for a piece of material ffs!

When I started in first year the quality was much better, that jumper did me two years which made it a bit better, but the company started to put out shoddier and shoddier goods, obviously to make more money.

Also with the price of uniforms I couldn't afford to have a spare so I had to spend 5 days in the same outfit (clean shirt and stuff, obviously). Not enjoyable. I'd have loved to have a couple of skirts from Dunnes or somewhere so I could throw one in the wash andf not have to worry. Ironing it is a nightmare too.

yurmothrintites · 25-08-2009 08:57PM

That's an awful amount for a jumper and skirt and I agree that in that case, the school should possibly change supplier and go for a cheaper option. When I was in school, I had to use the same uniform for 5 days in a row, but obviously I had a few shirts to my disposal.

I'm not going to go on about the price of uniform but I will agree with Wertz that the cost of some uniforms is preventing the more disadvantaged families from buying much more needed items for family life. It's just my opinion that buying a good jumper will save money in the long run.

I believe though that some schools go to far with the subject of uniforms. Having a school crest on a coat, jumper or cardigan is enough, but putting it on a specific pinafore, trousers, skirt and polo shirts is to much and costing families vital money.

No book Grant this year

Comments