School trying to make helmets compulsory

[landsurfer]

They don't.
That is why i am very interested in this school.

[DaveMcK]

It's Finham Park, Coventry.

[landsurfer]

I have contacted the head teacher by email.
I have asked them to confirm or deny reports that they require pupils to wear helmets when cycling to and from school.
I have asked them to confirm or deny reports that they will impound cycles belonging to pupils who do not wear helmets.
I have asked them to confirm the legal position that supports these actions, if accurate.

I will not be surprised if this is news to them .....

[Cunobelin]

Our kids and grand kids schools have always entered in to friendly discussion when challenged on their rules and regs.

They do, but in the end you have to admit that they are right and you will obey them in future.
Discussion is encouraged, so long as you accept they are right in the end. I havent yet met a Headteacher who could ever be wrong. Believing that they know best is a key point in the job profile.

I think it is an important part of a child's education to learn how to deal with having to obey stupid rules.
We accept a whole host of school's pointless rules, we dont really have much choice in the matter.

The same rules apply at Scouts or a British Cycling children's cycling club.

In both cases you have a choice, with the School you don't

[Cunobelin]

Following my above post, the school's written confiscation policy:

Confiscation Including retention and disposal of inappropriate items Key points

 Schools can include confiscation of students' property as a disciplinary sanction in their behaviour policy.  To be lawful, confiscation must be a reasonable sanction in the circumstances of the particular case.

 Decisions about retention and disposal of confiscated property must also be reasonable in the circumstances of the particular case.

 The Education and Inspections Act 2006 includes a specific statutory defence for school staff who have reasonably confiscated students' property.

What criteria for confiscation might be used by a school? These criteria are for individual schools to determine in the light of their policies on school uniform or behaviour generally. They might include:
 an item poses a threat to others: for example, a laser pen is being used to distract and possibly harm other students or staff  an item poses a threat to good order for learning: for example, a student uses a personal music-player in class
 an item is against school uniform rules: for example, a student refuses to take off a baseball cap on entering a classroom
 an item poses a health or safety threat: for example, a student wearing large ornate rings in PE may present a safety threat to other students  an item which is counter to the ethos of the school: for example, material which might cause tension between one community and another
 an item which is illegal for a child to have: for example, racist or pornographic material;

What to do with confiscated items
 Confiscated items should be handed in at reception for collecting at 3pm.
 For items of obvious value, this would be in the school safe- the item should have students NAME, MENTOR GROUP and YEAR written clearly on the item  All reasonable steps should be taken to make such arrangements secure.
 If weapons or drugs are found on students a member of the leadership team (usually staff on call) should be called for immediately.

It appears that all the bikes will be stored in reception, or in the safe!

They cannot use "Health and Safety" as the HSE has stated that helmets are not PPE and cannot be covered under this legislation

[horizon]

What is the name of the school OP ?

Not everyone wants to publish the name of the school their child/ren go to. Even a large school could be located in a place where the OP could be readily identified, from knowing about this post and the name of the school.

That has certainly been true of a couple of places I have lived, including the village we lived in in Essex. Anyone there could have told who the only mum in the village was who had school aged children and liked cycling (or was likely to post on a cycling forum )

It seems that the OP has now released the name of the school. Helpful though this is to the forum, I don't think anyone should be under any pressure to reveal personal details of any sort - we take it on trust that what they say is true and lack of certain details does not invalidate what they are saying. I would support closer moderation on this. Lots of people read this forum not just the members and a search might bring up this discussion.

[DaveMcK]

Thank you, horizon. I appreciate that the majority here believe me, and I did not reveal the school's name because I felt under pressure to do so. I did so in the hope that it would be useful and lead to more specific advice. Cunobelin's post above confirms this.

Landsurfer's suspicion is understandable, as the school's position on this is genuinely hard to believe, and I'm not bothered by his implication that I'm lying. When the truth becomes clear, I'm sure his apology will be suitably blunt.

[thirdcrank]

... the school's position on this is genuinely hard to believe ...

It seems dead easy to me: backside-covering based on "common sense" and possibly the Highway Code.

[AlaninWales]

... the school's position on this is genuinely hard to believe ...

It seems dead easy to me: backside-covering based on "common sense" and possibly the Highway Code.

Alternatively it may be related to the "Word of the week" on the school's web page: "Incoherent"

[Wanlock Dod]

The same rules apply at Scouts or a British Cycling children's cycling club.

I'm not sure that they do. I'm not familiar with British Cycling due to their approach regarding headwear, but I am quiet sure that a Scout travelling to or from a Scout meeting cannot be instructed what to do or not do by a Scout Leader. The fact that Scouts don't cycle to Scout meetings because their parents consider it to be far too dangerous, and would prefer to contribute further to that danger by driving them, is neither here nor there. In this instance the discussion is about how one travels to an activity (e.g. school, Scouts, British Cycling events). I'm sure that British Cycling couldn't stop me from riding to one of their events, they could only prevent me from taking part in the event itself.

[Psamathe]

If the school deprives you of the legal use of something, I would assume they are liable (financially) to compensate you. So confiscate a child's bike when it is being used legally and that child cannot cycle to the shops so you might need to hire a bike or purchase a replacement or take taxis, ec. and I assume the school would be financially liable.

Confiscate the bike (that was being used legally) and your family cycle tour in Cornwall might no longer be possible and thus the school should (in my opinion) be liable for cancellation fees and compensation .....

etc.

Ian

[meic]

but I am quiet sure that a Scout travelling to or from a Scout meeting cannot be instructed what to do or not do by a Scout Leader.

They cant in theory but in practice they can make it a condition of being able to attend the group.
I fear that the headteacher at the school has the same power of exclusion or punishment (even though they claim it isnt punitive) if you try and thwart their will.

[Ruadh495]

I have a feeling that an enrolled child is a "member" of the school and thus subject to the school's regulations even off the school site / outside school hours.

Not sure though, it only took one meeting with "our" headteacher for us to start homeschooling...

[[XAP]Bob]

School rules do not apply at home - or at any time that the school is not in loco parentis.

If they claim to be in loco parentis throughout a child's journey home then the responsibilities associated with that position should *all* be upheld.

[Psamathe]

....
If they claim to be in loco parentis throughout a child's journey home then the responsibilities associated with that position should *all* be upheld.

(Noting I have no kids, no involvement with any schools, etc.) but is it for a school to decide when they are loco parentis? Could they unilaterally decide they are loco parentis on Sun between 9:00 and 11:00. I would assume that loco parentis responsibilities have to have agreed/defined boundaries e.g. set hours or set locations e.g. 09:00 to 16:00 weekdays. If they extend their loco parentis to include travel to and from school the "boundaries" need defined (i.e. at what point kids are returned to their parents responsibility) so if school include off premises travel to/from school then boundary has to be when child leaves/arrives home and so if kid stops on way home to play, cuts themselves = schools responsibility.

So if school assumed responsibility/liability for travel (through helmet rules) I'd be asking how they intend to provide adequate supervision of the child on their travel home.

Ian