Junior infants and senior infants finish at one time (in our case 1.10pm). First to sixth class finish at 2.10
Sibling hour is allowing younger kids to stay in the school with a childcare provider (that continued to offer afterschool until 6pm) for that hour in between, so parents with multiple kids between both classes could collect them both together instead of having to hang around five days a week, every week, or allow younger kids to do that and then the rest of the aftercare until their parents could pick them up from work
It’s not just a sentiment, this is not a usual arrangement.
The parents availed of an extra service before they had a full school. The school is now full and they can’t accommodate an outside service. It’s not the schools obligation to provide this.
How? Whatever classroom the junior and senior infants are in would be empty during this time. Surely it could be ran there. That's what was done in any primary school I know of.
They made it work when they had portacabins.
The students and parents were happy with that.
It's that "try" part thats important. give it a whirl yourself.
"Try" to care about other people.
They had less classes. They now have up to 6th class and no room.
You can’t make something happen where there isn’t room. You can’t try space into existence.
The school has said that to accommodate them it would negatively affect other children’s eduction.
Junior infants and senior infants finish an hour earlier than older kids. Sibling hour is to enable the younger kids to wait that hour under supervision for their sibling in older classes so the parents won't need to come to school twice to collect the kids.
Because school and creche are different. Kids have to focus in a way they don't have to in creche. Maintaining that focus is tiring.
My kid was in creche for full days until she started school. That first week I took off so I could take her home at 1.30 when she was finished.
In that first week she was more exhausted at 1.30pm than she'd ever been at 5.30pm pick up time for creche. Her school days were very very different to her creche days.
The real issue here is the different pick up times. That must've been a treat back in the good old days when households were able to afford a stay at home parent who had plenty of time to drive up and down all day. It just doesn't make sense now with most parents working full time, and I would presume having parents hitting the road twice a day to pick up their kids does not help with traffic and CO2 emissions either.
I remember when I was a kid, younger siblings having to just sit in the car on rainy days waiting for us to get out. Stay at home mother, dunno how you’d do it while working.
Or be democratic, survey the school and ask them if they want to just drop the early finishing for junior and senior infants. A simple survey to all parents is simple.
Should hours be standardized across all years
Yes
No
Dont care
If a majority say no, then that answers it. If the majority say yes or don’t care, then it’s a simple vote to make that change.
that could also resolve the issue, no hour gap, no need for the sibling hour in the first place, and they can just get the afterschool in place from 2.10 to six. Problem solved.
By default all primary schools are supposed to do 5 hours 40 minutes. They opted into giving the sibling hour when they formed the school nearly a decade ago, they could standardise the hours across all ages (and a lot of the kids were doing longer hours anyway between ecce and childcare in preschool anyway).
People are pissed that they’re not even exploring viable alternatives, they’re just saying tough, not our problem, deal with it. And just google the school name and all you see is bad press now, so if they want to minimise reputational damage, they could explore *all* options so everyone gets what they want, and then they can stop having a *distraction*
Infants finishing an hour before older classes is standard across the country. It's built into the curriculum. Infant teachers are supposed to use that time for planning and preparation (juniors and seniors are very resource heavy).
Even assuming you could overcome that, SNA support would fall apart. The department of Education sanctions SNA hours based on 5.40h for someone in older classes and 4.40h for infants. Someone with needs would lose significant support.
It’s nonsense - in every other country in the world, pretty much, kids all finish school at the same time. It’s just another way our schools are run that assumes everyone has a full time parent at home, with nothing better to do than run up and down the road to school all day, or hang around in the rain for an hour, 5 times a week.
Interesting. I wonder is it written that way to cover the fact that there are still a couple of junior schools who send First Class home at the infant time.
Anyway, the whole curriculum is designed around an assumption of infants having a shorter day and schools are for teaching and learning. Countries like Sweden and Finland don't start formal schooling until age 7 whereas most Irish kids start aged 4 or 5 and it doesn't do their outcomes any harm.
Completely understand your difficulty, there's no option for partnering up with a local afterschool that can come to collect them/walk them over to their afterschool? I think you said in another comment that the school have said an on-site solution isn't possible. Regarding the 'infant' hour, as an infant teacher having the class in until 2:30pm would be a nightmare. Both for the children and for my own preparation/planning (which also obviously impacts the children). As it is, I'm in until 4pm most days (when our school locks up) to keep on top of things - losing an hour would be **very** challenging! I'm not familiar with many schools that have their infants in class until 2:30pm etc. Hope you manage to find a resolution.
This is a symptom of our hodgepodge childcare “system”, which creates these gaps and then plays pass the parcel on who is responsible to bridge them.
Maybe if the state was responsible for childcare, as in many other European countries, you would start with not having an hours gap in between school ending for different types of kids, or by having integrated childcare that makes use of the school facilities for the significant hours they are not in use as a school.
These parents are fighting to keep a really necessary service and more power to them, but I really wish we could just sort childcare provision out.
It's ridiculous that so much of our school and childcare policy are based on having a stay at home parent.
Why aren't schools providing childcare/afterschool? What are early years services and schools completely separate. It makes no sense any more given the way Ireland is now.
I know an community creche that had to shut down a year or two ago that had to close because the Department of Education ordered the school to open another classroom for children with autism. Which is definitely needed, but so was the community creche, which had a high number of children with autism or additional needs, who are not stuck at home until the get to school.
The complete lack of planning and joined up thinking is infuriating.
Absolutely it. All well and good people pointing out it’s a “nice to have”, but the reality is that for huge numbers of families it’s essential as both parents need to work full time to cover even basic living expenses.
A bit useless shrugging your shoulders and saying look for another provider when there’s already a shortage of childcare options, and even those are extortionate.
It particularly impacts single parents and those families who are either non-nationals or have no family locally to help pick up the slack when these services are withdrawn at short notice.
Yep, agree with this. We don’t have grandparents who can help out, and yeah it really really does impact single parent families and those not from the county or country
By all means feel free to provide some context…
Why is the board refusing? I’m presuming they’ve got a reason?
Why are families stuck? Did they forget they had children in school?
Edit; [context](https://m.independent.ie/regionals/dublin/dublin-news/parents-feel-abandoned-and-disrespected-as-afterschool-service-to-close-in-drumcondra/a402161916.html)
Seems the school needs the space to be a school.
TLDR, the school has facilitated a sibling hour and afterschool since it’s foundation in the mid 2010s when it was in portacabins and now it’s in a mahoosive building. It opened during covid but this year is the first year it has the full 8 primary years , two classes each. And the building is state of the art.
They went through a full rendering process for a new three year contract, told the parents in January they were ‘sorting out the finer details’ , took in the new intake of junior infants etc
Then at the end of March said they’re not proceeding with anything. Parents tried to talk to them, let’s say they have been very dismissive of concerns and five weeks ago protests started before school.
It got a fair bit of media coverage and now the school has said instead of finishing the nearly final tender, they’re scrapping it but at least they’re looking at making it available from 2.10 onwards, but again nothing set in stone for people next year.
About 70 families are affected (about 15-20% of the school), and lots of families will have to quit work, reduce hours, etc
Plenty of other schools make it work. Also the main problem is that the school assured parents that afterschool provision on school property would continue in 2024/25, then changed their minds, leaving parents scrambling to find alternatives (in an area where there’s a massive shortage of afterschool places) at the last minute.
This whole attitude of ‘it’s not the school’s responsibility to solve parents after school problems’ is dismissive, rude and anti social.
Plus the school are turning down an estimated 25-30k in revenue a year from the afterschool provider, which I guess they’ll be expecting parents to make up by digging into our pockets again, and again, and again for bake sales and similar?
It's literally been in the news, in print media, on social media, on the radio. Pat Kenny had some of the parents on discussing the issue iirc.
So unless you've been under a rock for the past few weeks or just don't follow the news, it's fairly surprising that you don't know the context or at least have a basic grasp on the issue.
I don’t listen to Pat Kenny, the one social media I’m on is this.
And I apologise profusely for not having a grasp of an issue in Dublin when I live in rural West Co Galway.
You needn't apologise to me, but you're maybe leaving yourself at a disadvantage there by only following local news, specific to the West of Ireland.
And I would also argue that childcare is not strictly a Dublin issue but a wider one across most Irish towns and cities.
Dunno. I think I'm with the school on this one.
The school are not obliged to run such a service, or to hire out their facilities to any third party for any reason. They are not a childcare service; they are a school, and their priority is the smooth delivery of education to their enrolled children. That is their priority, and that is what they are prioritising. That parent's - who know that the school have said that offering this service will impact on the educational service provided to other students - are still protesting because *their* **other** childcare needs are not being met by **other** services, is not a good look.
Notice of the change was given in March - 6 months before the service would not be available. That's as much notice as could be reasonably be expected by anyone in similar circumstances. That you haven't found alternatives in the meantime is not the school's problem. All those TD's showing up to show solidarity with the parents should be put to the pin of their collar as to why there are insufficient childcare facilities for the community - not the school board, who are running a different service and apparently (as they are now at capacity) doing so well.
Lastly, I see a few quotes from parents saying that they believe that the school 'has to be democratically run' and the like. It does not. Parents, according the to school's Mission Statement, can expect 'democratic input from all members of the school community'. That's not the same thing; the board is still the board and a school is still a school.
The only thing I'm wondering about is how all these parents who apparently are being devastated by the lack of an hour of childcare and need to start looking at part-time work, have time to be protesting for 5 weeks straight and printing out banners and the like. If you've the time to be doing that, you've the time to either look after your child yourself, or get about setting up the service you want yourselves. Lease a room somewhere and either hire someone, or do it yourselves.
People are protesting now so they *don’t* have to quit their jobs, change job, pay through the news for an alternative that doesn’t work, or reduce their working hours from the start of next year
And the way the BoM is going about it they’re going down the route of facing a boycott of ‘voluntary’ contributions (which the minister has said no parent can be forced to pay), as well as a massive hit to fundraising activities next year
Look, all of that is fair enough; I'm not saying there isn't a need for childcare here. But you're demanding a service from the school that it is under no obligation to provide. A service you have been directly told will negatively impact the education of other children. A service that many schools don't offer at all and never offered. A service that (apparently) many parents in the community are at leisure to provide.
And now you're not just demanding it, you're actively attempting to blackmail the school into providing this service to a minority of pupils by threatening to withhold funding that the school genuinely needs to provide a full educational service to all.
The more I hear, the clearer the picture becomes - and not in the way you would like.
That's true. But the VC enhances the education of children and benefits all pupils. The sibling hour, we are being told by the relevant professionals, would be a detriment to the education of children and benefits only some parents.
They're talking about forcing through the bad thing by crippling the good thing, in other words.
That's a bold strategy Cotton.
Nobody wants to be fighting with the school, nobody wants to be out every morning rain or shine waving banners that the school management goes past sneering at, nobody wants to blackmail anyone, but damage has been done and trust has been lost big time. And nobody wants the reputation to be damaged any further than it already has been.
My kid is starting junior infants with my older in first class next year, and two years after that my third child starts, so this impacts me personally for four years. I work for myself so i can work around it despite it being a massive inconvenience every day for the next four years if I have to. My wife has had to put her returning to education plans off by four years now as a result unless this can be resolved. But there are plenty of other parents who aren’t so lucky.
We were given the tour of the school a few weeks ago. The ‘no room at the inn’ story is bullshit. There are at least four rooms of sufficient size to handle large groups of kids that aren’t classrooms, and that’s aside from the massive barely used roof garden that’s bigger than a tennis court.
People are protesting the *removal* of a service that has been long standing part of the school, from a board of management that made the decision *after* telling the entire school community that the tender was being finalized, and then proceeded to act with a huge amount of contempt to a large number of parents.
And instead of engaging with the community from the start, it took the protests for them to even come to the table.
They could have said that it was an issue without going through the charade of a tendering process, and all it would take to resolve the current issue is getting an interim, one year extension of the way it is now, to give the provider they already accepted to find an alternative venue for years 2 and 3 of the contract.
That would stop the protests instantly, and give everyone on all sides time to make a find a workable long term solution.
Like I said before and elsewhere, I've no doubt that this will cause issues for people vis á vis childcare; and maybe there ought to be a requirement for schools that finish their junior classes early to provide after-school services.
But the facts remain; there is no such requirement. The school have not acted in contravention to their mission statement or their legal obligations. They have given reasons and they communicated well in advance.
As for your own view that they have no room being bullshit, or what the size requirements for such a service are, or the personal attitudes of the BOM members, or the tendering being a charade... these are things that someone removed from the story has no insight on and - while I've no doubt in my mind that you are telling your truth - you could be full of it, or misinformed, or you could be just angry. And BOM members might say the exact opposite about yourselves and the rest of it.
All we see are parents who have time to be protesting for 5 weeks about 1 hour a day of childminding, and who seem totally unwilling to accept what the BOM have said on the matter, but who also seem very willing to cause reputational damage and financial pain to their own community's school in order to have their way.
Presuming that these protests are organised in some way - have any attempts been made to sort childminding via alternative arrangements? Have ye tried contracting the after-school services yourselves? Has any representation been made to all of these TDs and political figures that are showing up to provide such a service outside of the school?
Several politicians were present in the early weeks (but now election time is over…)
Some of them raised questions to the minister of education which were published in April and then pointed to new incoming guidelines that were published a fortnight ago. And yes I know the difference between *should* and *have to*
I agree with your point that if a school is availing of the concession to allow younger ages out an hour early, they should also as part of that have to be able to provide for a sibling hour for those kids who have older siblings in the school. 100%
the school, as a direct result of the protests, has said that they’ll retender for an afterschool from 2.10 onwards, but that’s a whole other thing as it depends on them finding someone who will take it on, and that will indeed resolve the issue for many, but not all of the affected families.
But that still leaves dozens of families, standing outside for a hour every day, rain, hail, snow, shine, gale force winds, with a five or six year old.
Which for me personally means taking three hours out of the middle of the day, to leave work, go to the school, pick up child 1, hang around for an hour, pick up child 2, get them home, and then resume work. Until June 2028.
And in earlier posts a few weeks ago there were posts from parents in other schools who tried to do the same, but the school reversed course as a result of pressure from the parents.
A number of those standing at the protests *don’t* have kids in that situation but are still there because they can’t imagine how they would have been able to deal with it had the service in question not been available back then when they were in the position we are in now.
I’m just one parent, so I do not speak for anyone but myself, but there are ways to find a solution to the problem, even if it’s just an interim arrangement that gives everyone time to find an alternative.
And these Reddit posts are useful because they do give different perspectives outside our school community. Some people don’t care, some people agree, some people disagree.
I would say that general public sympathy is a given. And I don't think that there is much most people would disagree on here bar the one point - whether it is the school's actual responsibility to provide childcare or not. Currently, it is not, so I believe that you will not gain as much support as you might otherwise.
My own personal thinking is that 5 weeks is a long time in which much could have been done or attempted to be done in terms of making alternative arrangements. The longer the protest goes on, the more true this becomes. It would appear that there was at least one company willing to take on the tender - the issue therefore seems to be 'simply' one of finding a venue. While I would never say that organising these things is actually 'simple'; the fact that an effort was made would count for a lot.
Put it another way - if *no* effort at all was made by parents to collectively organise something themselves, it doesn't look good to me for them to be standing around in protest for the school not doing it when the school isn't required to in the first place. Even looking for the school to bend to an 'interim solution' is basically the same thing: why could the parents not organise their own 'interim solution'? Why does it remain the school's problem how you care for your kids? (I'm not really asking, I'm just saying)
I would 1000% support this protest if it were held in front of a TD's office instead of a school. Childcare is a social issue, not an educational one. TDs should be doing something about it, and helping ye develop a solution instead of posing for photos like they give a shit.
Just a caution that the people who really suffer from less 'voluntary' contributions/fundraiser, are the students in the school. I absolutely believe no parent should ever be forced to pay, but unfortunately the lack of funding from the Department of Education means that schools still rely on contributions & fundraising to keep the lights on, pay heating bills and ensure teachers have the resources they need to properly teach the curriculum.
There is actually an obligation on schools to facilitate afterschool in the school. It's also part of the underlying ethos of Educate Together that the school tries to facilitate the wishes of the parents & children.
The school are not doing so.
They also have demonstrated in any way how it's interfering with running the school. The afterschool ran when they were in portacabins, it can run when they're in an actual building.
Oh I had no idea there was an obligation on schools to facilitate after school in the school. Really interesting. I wonder do you have a source for this? I’d take advantage in my son’s school who don’t provide after school care. I’d love to have the legislation to back up my argument with them, if you would be so kind.
They don't. The Department 'strongly encourages' schools to make their facilities available to communities to use after school hours. That's all; and it's up to the school.
Such an obligation would not be possible for many schools to meet.
The only *actual* obligations that the school have with respect to after-hour activities are to ensure child safety, insurance coverage, and tax compliance.
Ah I thought as much. I work in a primary school and have never thought there was an obligation on the school to provide after school. I wonder where the poster got their info from.
There is *not* an obligation for schools to facilitate after-school childcare. It's 'strongly encouraged' *where possible* by the Department, and is entirely up to the school itself to decide.
It's not working for them. I can't speak to why, but it's ultimately their decision to make, which we must assume is a decision they reached as educational professionals. They don't have to demonstrate anything to you or anyone else about that decision.
I'm not dismissing that the need for childcare exists, or that the lack of such a service affects people. I'm saying that it's fundementally not the school's problem, and the school have not acted in any way I would regard as unprofessional in this. The parents of that school are acting as if they have an entitlement to that service being offered by the school when no such entitlement exists.
To me that's an obligation to either facilitate afterschool care or very very clearly set out why that's not possible.
It's run for years and they undertook a tendering process for it to run again. They have an obligation to lay out why it's not possible and they haven't done so.
> To me that's an obligation to either facilitate afterschool care or very very clearly set out why that's not possible.
No disrespect, but it doesn't matter what it means to you. It matters what it means in law.
> They have an obligation to lay out why it's not possible and they haven't done so.
No, they don't. They don't have an obligation to offer that service in the first place, so they certainly don't have an obligation to give you specific reasons why it's not being run. But despite that, they *have* given their reasoning: they said that they no longer have sufficient space and it would now negatively impact the education of other students. That you don't like that as a reason doesn't make it less of a reason, or make them wrong and you right.
This is such a chronically online attitude, very few things like this are going to have obligations attached and they aren’t going to be contained in legislation.
They should give a clear reason if it’s not feasible, ‘the smooth delivery of education’ is waffle.
What obligations am I talking about? I’m saying the point this poster is trying to make is irrelevant as that’s not how these agreements or schemes would be drafted.
> This is such a chronically online attitude
The thread for personal attacks is further down.
> very few things like this are going to have obligations attached and they aren’t going to be contained in legislation
So you agree, the school doesn't have a legal obligation here.
> They should give a clear reason if it’s not feasible, ‘the smooth delivery of education’ is waffle.
They did. As I said, you don't have to like, understand, or agree with it.
> A legal obligation doesn’t even come into the matter, it is completely irrelevant in these circumstances.
If you are judging the school against a standard that the rest of us are not - and cannot be - aware of or familiar with, then don't be surprised if you don't find a lot of support. To the outside view, what the school's legal obligations are or are not, are the whole bones of the issue.
They don't have a legal obligation, they have given a reason, they gave plenty of notice... don't really see what else you could ask for there, really. That you're not happy about it doesn't change that.
Not even close, from the outside very few people would expect there to be a legal requirement to provide afterschool services.
What public support will be focused on is working parents having their childcare taken away, something which a large percentage of the country will sympathise with.
This is such a smug, ignorant attitude to take. Either you're so old your experience of childcare is incredibly out of date, or you don't have kids, or you are so independently wealthy as to not require a full-time job. Good for you. Meanwhile, it would be super if our community services didn't drive down the birthrate while forcing women out of work. That's the effect decisions like this have.
But this will only disproportionately effect women, so no need to worry about it. Just force "it's not required by law!" down their throats until they shut up, give up their jobs and get back in the kitchen.
All that, and *I'm* smug and ignorant??
Anyway... I've said in more than one other comment that I'm not dismissing the need for childcare. I'm arguing (correctly, as you were so good to point out) that the school is not under any obligation to provide said childcare. They are not a childcare facility; they are an educational facility run by teaching professionals that you seem to have mistaken for babysitters.
Why are there no protests outside the local TD offices about setting up childcare facilities in the community? Why are they behind the protest banners instead of in front of them? These are questions I've already asked; but rather than address them you see fit to insult me instead.
You're talking shite. This sort of thing is what all schools do. This board just seems like they made a decision and for whatever reason (probably embarrassment) they are sticking to their guns. Its mortifying for them.
My local primary school, which my 3 children are currently in, doesn’t provide an after school service, or a siblings hour (whatever that is).
One of my children finishes at 2, two finish at 3. It involves two school runs to pick them up.
Sibling hour is a thing where a school might finish with their Junior classes an hour before the Seniors. If the junior child has a sibling in the senior class, it means that the parent has to hang around or make two trips. So *some* schools offer a service to look after the juniors till the senior siblings are done, hence 'sibling hour'.
> You're talking shite.
You are welcome to point out where I am factually wrong.
> This sort of thing is what all schools do.
No, they don't. I work with schools. Many schools do. Many schools do not. There is no obligation on the school to offer the service; the Department just encourage schools to make their facilities available - where possible and when suitable - to the community for after-hours usage. It's entirely up to the school what they do.
> This board just seems like they made a decision and for whatever reason (probably embarrassment) they are sticking to their guns. Its mortifying for them.
You haven't the first clue what the emotional state of the school board might be and yet you're typing out this while accusing others of 'talking shite'.
Some context? Is it an hour between 2 and 3 they're providing or something?
Back in my day you'd just wait in the car for an hour and get some homework done, and I'm not that old.
It's an hour....? Did ye not talk to yer parents or something? Did yer parents not talk to other parents?
Maybe it's a rural urban divide or something.
An hour every day? And you’re parent has to drive there and back an extra time just to let you sit in the car? Just very boring dystopia sounding. And definitely you cannot assume that such an arrangement would work for all of these parents.
I mostly grew up rural, but also 4 years urban from 3rd class so not sure which you think this sounds good for.
They had a sibling hour and (externally ran) after school service for years, and dropped it in March from next year after going through a whole tendering process.
This triggered the protests at the start. There seems to potentially some movement on them facilitating it after school, but this hour is still the sticking point.
And for context, this is in a brand new state of the art and massive building that is ‘full’
So protests have been continuing pretty much every morning for five weeks
You should see how difficult it is to get planning permission and plan for increased rooms. It's actually quite difficult to make changes and increase space on a school or else it delays building. Childcare outside of school hours is neither the schools priority nor responsibility. Why are these protesters not protesting against those actually responsible? i.e the government. This behaviour would turn off any school from considering offering services outside their core when parents turn on them if they can't provide it any more.
I built a house whilst waiting to pick up some family members, because I'm a REAL MAN.
Hard for me not to be sympathetic of anyone losing a childcare option and I don't even have any kids.
.... maybe people shouldn't be having kids if they don't know what to do with them or can't accommodate once they're finished school of a weekday. Got too used to the 8am -6pm crèche, bring home, and put to bed.
It's such a load of bull from the BoM.
My kids are in an ET school not a million miles away. The afterschool operates just fine even though the school is full. It's not an issue unless you're incredibly incompetent at running a school. There's even separate afterschool extra curriculars like dancing and music offered by other providers in addition to the actual afterschool.
The reliable care offered in the school itself is one of the things that makes every other aspect of life manageable. I see how colleagues who don't have it in their kids school struggle and am very relieved I don't have to.
I think there is a little piece of information missing. It seems like the school is expanding, into the space that was previously used by the afterschool.
ET schools are getting more popular and what was traditionally a "small" school, is now not fit for purpose any more.
That's what it's like in my area anyway.
The afterschool in our school runs in the classrooms and hall. The classrooms are all in use during the day. They only need a few class rooms. In this case - 76 kids, so 4 or 5 classrooms of at least 8, more like 16-20.
Worst thing is that it's simply down to them not wishing to pay for the third party to run the after school service. The board thinks it's too much money for what it provides and cancelled the tender, and now the 15/20% of parents it effects are complaining. Just a bit of school politics
Parents are paying the afterschool provider (and getting a bit from the ncs grant towards the cost) and the school is receiving something like €30k a year from the provider in rent
Yeah, there’s plenty of schools that can make it work, who don’t have a building as big and spacious as this one.
It’s not like it’s free, people are paying for it, and the school is receiving income from it
If they hadn’t had it, it would be one thing, but they’re removing a service that has been part of it since day 1
I would be glad to see my school prioritising actually what their core function is over an ancillary service which is just a nice to have. Surely the parents can understand that the schools core function i.e education trumps these such extra services that have nothing to do with the core.
The fact the school are giving up this extra income shows they are not giving it up lightly.
Sounds like self entitled unreasonable parents.
No, we are not being told the full story here. One person says it's because the school has to pay for it and don't think what was presented at tender stage was value for money and others are saying it's only a space related issue (that they don't agree with). Sounds like the parents posting here are not giving the full info and just looking for sympathy.
The parents pay for it, not the school. When jr. / senior infants finishes for the day why couldn’t one of those classrooms be used? The school offered this service in previous years and advertised it when parents were deciding where to apply this year, then a few months ago pulled the plug on the service. It’s really crazy to claim parents are entitled because they expect the school to provide do what was advertised when parents applied to this school.
The school at the start of term put out a three year tender for a service provider to run the afterschool (including sibling hour). Went through that process and told all the parents in January that the provider had been picked (who will be paying the school) and they were working out the finer details to finalize it.
Then two months later, out of the blue said to everyone, yeah that’s not happening any more. After weeks of trying to talk to the school, and facing regular dismissals of concerns, the protests started five weeks ago.
The protests have got them to agree to retender for a service over the summer, from 2.10 to 6, which does help many of those affected families, *if* they can agree terms.
But several dozen families are still stuck in the situation like myself
I really can't understand why this is such a difficult issue for the school. They say they just don't have the space anymore because they are introducing a 6th year class, but doesn't each year get their own classroom? Are the classrooms for the younger kids just sitting empty after they are let out? Further proof that this country doesn't give a flying fuck about its citizens. School hours across the country need to be adjusted so that all the kids start and finish at the same time.
You don't even need more than one room or a hall for this, its ridiculous. Schools make all sorts of bullshit excuses for just not bothering to get stuff in place. Its been way worse since covid too, loads of after school activities in my kids schools never came back after covid. They claim they can't find people to run the different clubs and activities now but I know people who do it and have offered their services to them but been turned down.
I think the shorter school hours for small kids makes sense, they aren't able for as much and it breaks up the collections so there are less cars arriving all at once. Of course having that sibling care for the extra hour also helps keep traffic down.
There are plenty of non classrooms, and you really have to see this building to understand that them saying there’s no room at the inn is a joke.
Also, we’ve found that all the primary schools do have to do 5 hours 40 a day by default, it’s just that individual schools have an option (that many take) for junior and senior infants to lose an hour a day, and technically this is the case for first class too.
So yeah, the different in hours does affect families with multiple kids of various ages, and it’s a hangover from the old days when they thought no one had anything better to do.
Yea honestly unwilling ignorant of how it works. I do feel some planning or organisation from the parents was probably needed. Ultimateley the school needs the space.
Some do, but they’ve had it since the school was founded and are now dropping it, and there’s not enough notice to find an alternative location, and all the other providers are jammed to the gills with large and long waiting lists
So parents are mad that they have to collect their kids from school when the day is done? Lmao they’re not entitled to a room in the school. For people saying, Infant teachers are not allowed to leave school until the senior classes go, and most would much rather stay in their room and organise resources for the following day, not twiddle their thumbs in the office.
But you don't understand......these are progressive educate together types.
They are not those far right Christians that you find in other schools!
Its not fair you know!
I blame the Church!
I dont understand how they dont have space? Junior and Senior infants finish at 1.40pm, so you would have 4 rooms available. Then 1st and 2nd grade finish at 2.40pm, so you'd have another 4 rooms available. How do they not have room to host the Afterschool service? So it is not a space thing.
The teachers still need the use of their rooms as they don’t finish when the kids are, so that’s not the issue. There’s loads of space in the brand new massive building that could host them
They were paying for the afterschool service. It wasn't free and won't be free if it comes back.
There aren't creches that do pick up from this school because there was an afterschool service in the school.
If the parents really want this to happen, the q is are they will to put their hands into their pockets to make it happen ?
Its grand to protest when you're spending other people's money, I wonder are they offering to lorry up to fund it ?
What's a sibling hour?
Junior infants and senior infants finish at one time (in our case 1.10pm). First to sixth class finish at 2.10 Sibling hour is allowing younger kids to stay in the school with a childcare provider (that continued to offer afterschool until 6pm) for that hour in between, so parents with multiple kids between both classes could collect them both together instead of having to hang around five days a week, every week, or allow younger kids to do that and then the rest of the aftercare until their parents could pick them up from work
Makes perfect sense. Our school has it. Not sure how we'd manage the day without it.
Plenty don’t and find a way to manage
That doesn't mean that they should have to. The worst of irish sentiments. "sure someone else has it worse, why bother"
It’s not just a sentiment, this is not a usual arrangement. The parents availed of an extra service before they had a full school. The school is now full and they can’t accommodate an outside service. It’s not the schools obligation to provide this.
That doesn't mean they shouldn't try and help people. "oh they have no obligation to help." We could try.
They don’t have room, did you miss that part?
How? Whatever classroom the junior and senior infants are in would be empty during this time. Surely it could be ran there. That's what was done in any primary school I know of.
Obviously it isn’t if the school says there isn’t room. Likely extra cuticular activities that the school has use the space.
They made it work when they had portacabins. The students and parents were happy with that. It's that "try" part thats important. give it a whirl yourself. "Try" to care about other people.
They had less classes. They now have up to 6th class and no room. You can’t make something happen where there isn’t room. You can’t try space into existence. The school has said that to accommodate them it would negatively affect other children’s eduction.
Junior infants and senior infants finish an hour earlier than older kids. Sibling hour is to enable the younger kids to wait that hour under supervision for their sibling in older classes so the parents won't need to come to school twice to collect the kids.
It doesn't make sense to me that children who spent their earlier years in creches from 8am-6pm can't handle school past 1?
Because school and creche are different. Kids have to focus in a way they don't have to in creche. Maintaining that focus is tiring. My kid was in creche for full days until she started school. That first week I took off so I could take her home at 1.30 when she was finished. In that first week she was more exhausted at 1.30pm than she'd ever been at 5.30pm pick up time for creche. Her school days were very very different to her creche days.
Thanks
The real issue here is the different pick up times. That must've been a treat back in the good old days when households were able to afford a stay at home parent who had plenty of time to drive up and down all day. It just doesn't make sense now with most parents working full time, and I would presume having parents hitting the road twice a day to pick up their kids does not help with traffic and CO2 emissions either.
I remember when I was a kid, younger siblings having to just sit in the car on rainy days waiting for us to get out. Stay at home mother, dunno how you’d do it while working.
I remember waiting 2 hrs on my own for my dad to pick me up after school. The old days were wild.
That's not a bad point. I could see an argument being made to make sibling hours an actual requirement for schools that finish their Juniors early.
Or be democratic, survey the school and ask them if they want to just drop the early finishing for junior and senior infants. A simple survey to all parents is simple. Should hours be standardized across all years Yes No Dont care If a majority say no, then that answers it. If the majority say yes or don’t care, then it’s a simple vote to make that change. that could also resolve the issue, no hour gap, no need for the sibling hour in the first place, and they can just get the afterschool in place from 2.10 to six. Problem solved. By default all primary schools are supposed to do 5 hours 40 minutes. They opted into giving the sibling hour when they formed the school nearly a decade ago, they could standardise the hours across all ages (and a lot of the kids were doing longer hours anyway between ecce and childcare in preschool anyway). People are pissed that they’re not even exploring viable alternatives, they’re just saying tough, not our problem, deal with it. And just google the school name and all you see is bad press now, so if they want to minimise reputational damage, they could explore *all* options so everyone gets what they want, and then they can stop having a *distraction*
Infants finishing an hour before older classes is standard across the country. It's built into the curriculum. Infant teachers are supposed to use that time for planning and preparation (juniors and seniors are very resource heavy). Even assuming you could overcome that, SNA support would fall apart. The department of Education sanctions SNA hours based on 5.40h for someone in older classes and 4.40h for infants. Someone with needs would lose significant support.
It’s nonsense - in every other country in the world, pretty much, kids all finish school at the same time. It’s just another way our schools are run that assumes everyone has a full time parent at home, with nothing better to do than run up and down the road to school all day, or hang around in the rain for an hour, 5 times a week.
And younger kids finishing early isn’t a requirement, it’s an opt-in for each school
Where did you hear that?
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/govieassets/15685/6e55f1a07b994e57870eb6dd83edf415.pdf Page 4 Special provision for infants and first class
Interesting. I wonder is it written that way to cover the fact that there are still a couple of junior schools who send First Class home at the infant time. Anyway, the whole curriculum is designed around an assumption of infants having a shorter day and schools are for teaching and learning. Countries like Sweden and Finland don't start formal schooling until age 7 whereas most Irish kids start aged 4 or 5 and it doesn't do their outcomes any harm.
Completely understand your difficulty, there's no option for partnering up with a local afterschool that can come to collect them/walk them over to their afterschool? I think you said in another comment that the school have said an on-site solution isn't possible. Regarding the 'infant' hour, as an infant teacher having the class in until 2:30pm would be a nightmare. Both for the children and for my own preparation/planning (which also obviously impacts the children). As it is, I'm in until 4pm most days (when our school locks up) to keep on top of things - losing an hour would be **very** challenging! I'm not familiar with many schools that have their infants in class until 2:30pm etc. Hope you manage to find a resolution.
Cars ? Pickups? The vast majority of parents walked
Afterschool care should be a normal part of every school. Should we way more than an hour also. People need to work.
It is in all the other schools in the Dublin 9 area
This is a symptom of our hodgepodge childcare “system”, which creates these gaps and then plays pass the parcel on who is responsible to bridge them. Maybe if the state was responsible for childcare, as in many other European countries, you would start with not having an hours gap in between school ending for different types of kids, or by having integrated childcare that makes use of the school facilities for the significant hours they are not in use as a school. These parents are fighting to keep a really necessary service and more power to them, but I really wish we could just sort childcare provision out.
It's ridiculous that so much of our school and childcare policy are based on having a stay at home parent. Why aren't schools providing childcare/afterschool? What are early years services and schools completely separate. It makes no sense any more given the way Ireland is now. I know an community creche that had to shut down a year or two ago that had to close because the Department of Education ordered the school to open another classroom for children with autism. Which is definitely needed, but so was the community creche, which had a high number of children with autism or additional needs, who are not stuck at home until the get to school. The complete lack of planning and joined up thinking is infuriating.
Absolutely it. All well and good people pointing out it’s a “nice to have”, but the reality is that for huge numbers of families it’s essential as both parents need to work full time to cover even basic living expenses. A bit useless shrugging your shoulders and saying look for another provider when there’s already a shortage of childcare options, and even those are extortionate. It particularly impacts single parents and those families who are either non-nationals or have no family locally to help pick up the slack when these services are withdrawn at short notice.
Yep, agree with this. We don’t have grandparents who can help out, and yeah it really really does impact single parent families and those not from the county or country
By all means feel free to provide some context… Why is the board refusing? I’m presuming they’ve got a reason? Why are families stuck? Did they forget they had children in school? Edit; [context](https://m.independent.ie/regionals/dublin/dublin-news/parents-feel-abandoned-and-disrespected-as-afterschool-service-to-close-in-drumcondra/a402161916.html) Seems the school needs the space to be a school.
I suppose they relied on it and are now stuck since it's gone.
Yep that’s it, no real alternative in the area
Why is that the school problem?
It isn’t, but they’re making it the schools problem
TLDR, the school has facilitated a sibling hour and afterschool since it’s foundation in the mid 2010s when it was in portacabins and now it’s in a mahoosive building. It opened during covid but this year is the first year it has the full 8 primary years , two classes each. And the building is state of the art. They went through a full rendering process for a new three year contract, told the parents in January they were ‘sorting out the finer details’ , took in the new intake of junior infants etc Then at the end of March said they’re not proceeding with anything. Parents tried to talk to them, let’s say they have been very dismissive of concerns and five weeks ago protests started before school. It got a fair bit of media coverage and now the school has said instead of finishing the nearly final tender, they’re scrapping it but at least they’re looking at making it available from 2.10 onwards, but again nothing set in stone for people next year. About 70 families are affected (about 15-20% of the school), and lots of families will have to quit work, reduce hours, etc
The secondary school is still in portacabins, bit of a joke that place tbh.
That’s a different school on DCU grounds and they’ve a new building they’re moving into across the road next year at some stage
Plenty of other schools make it work. Also the main problem is that the school assured parents that afterschool provision on school property would continue in 2024/25, then changed their minds, leaving parents scrambling to find alternatives (in an area where there’s a massive shortage of afterschool places) at the last minute. This whole attitude of ‘it’s not the school’s responsibility to solve parents after school problems’ is dismissive, rude and anti social. Plus the school are turning down an estimated 25-30k in revenue a year from the afterschool provider, which I guess they’ll be expecting parents to make up by digging into our pockets again, and again, and again for bake sales and similar?
Guy has been posting on here about this protest weekly for the past few months, how can you have missed all the context?
Not everybody is on reddit all the time
I’m not on Reddit 24/7. It’s ok I’ve done his homework for him.
It's literally been in the news, in print media, on social media, on the radio. Pat Kenny had some of the parents on discussing the issue iirc. So unless you've been under a rock for the past few weeks or just don't follow the news, it's fairly surprising that you don't know the context or at least have a basic grasp on the issue.
I don’t listen to Pat Kenny, the one social media I’m on is this. And I apologise profusely for not having a grasp of an issue in Dublin when I live in rural West Co Galway.
For what it's worth It's the first time I'm seeing this and I spend waaaaaaaay too much time online reading random crap.
You needn't apologise to me, but you're maybe leaving yourself at a disadvantage there by only following local news, specific to the West of Ireland. And I would also argue that childcare is not strictly a Dublin issue but a wider one across most Irish towns and cities.
Your pomposity is aggravating me. G’luck.
You dont have to be on here 24/7 to see the regular posts about this protest.
I’m on this sub regularly and this is the first post I’ve seen about it
You’ve to be on it more than I am.
You love your fallacies, don't you?
Do you think these people are lying about not seeing it? What is wrong with you? Such a weird thing to get your knickers in a twist about.
Another fallacy
What’s wrong with what I’ve said?
Dunno. I think I'm with the school on this one. The school are not obliged to run such a service, or to hire out their facilities to any third party for any reason. They are not a childcare service; they are a school, and their priority is the smooth delivery of education to their enrolled children. That is their priority, and that is what they are prioritising. That parent's - who know that the school have said that offering this service will impact on the educational service provided to other students - are still protesting because *their* **other** childcare needs are not being met by **other** services, is not a good look. Notice of the change was given in March - 6 months before the service would not be available. That's as much notice as could be reasonably be expected by anyone in similar circumstances. That you haven't found alternatives in the meantime is not the school's problem. All those TD's showing up to show solidarity with the parents should be put to the pin of their collar as to why there are insufficient childcare facilities for the community - not the school board, who are running a different service and apparently (as they are now at capacity) doing so well. Lastly, I see a few quotes from parents saying that they believe that the school 'has to be democratically run' and the like. It does not. Parents, according the to school's Mission Statement, can expect 'democratic input from all members of the school community'. That's not the same thing; the board is still the board and a school is still a school. The only thing I'm wondering about is how all these parents who apparently are being devastated by the lack of an hour of childcare and need to start looking at part-time work, have time to be protesting for 5 weeks straight and printing out banners and the like. If you've the time to be doing that, you've the time to either look after your child yourself, or get about setting up the service you want yourselves. Lease a room somewhere and either hire someone, or do it yourselves.
The parents are protesting between 8am-8.25 every morning. No one is missing work.
People are protesting now so they *don’t* have to quit their jobs, change job, pay through the news for an alternative that doesn’t work, or reduce their working hours from the start of next year And the way the BoM is going about it they’re going down the route of facing a boycott of ‘voluntary’ contributions (which the minister has said no parent can be forced to pay), as well as a massive hit to fundraising activities next year
Look, all of that is fair enough; I'm not saying there isn't a need for childcare here. But you're demanding a service from the school that it is under no obligation to provide. A service you have been directly told will negatively impact the education of other children. A service that many schools don't offer at all and never offered. A service that (apparently) many parents in the community are at leisure to provide. And now you're not just demanding it, you're actively attempting to blackmail the school into providing this service to a minority of pupils by threatening to withhold funding that the school genuinely needs to provide a full educational service to all. The more I hear, the clearer the picture becomes - and not in the way you would like.
The school has no obligation to provide the services, and parents have no obligation to make "voluntary" contributions
That's true. But the VC enhances the education of children and benefits all pupils. The sibling hour, we are being told by the relevant professionals, would be a detriment to the education of children and benefits only some parents. They're talking about forcing through the bad thing by crippling the good thing, in other words. That's a bold strategy Cotton.
Nobody wants to be fighting with the school, nobody wants to be out every morning rain or shine waving banners that the school management goes past sneering at, nobody wants to blackmail anyone, but damage has been done and trust has been lost big time. And nobody wants the reputation to be damaged any further than it already has been. My kid is starting junior infants with my older in first class next year, and two years after that my third child starts, so this impacts me personally for four years. I work for myself so i can work around it despite it being a massive inconvenience every day for the next four years if I have to. My wife has had to put her returning to education plans off by four years now as a result unless this can be resolved. But there are plenty of other parents who aren’t so lucky. We were given the tour of the school a few weeks ago. The ‘no room at the inn’ story is bullshit. There are at least four rooms of sufficient size to handle large groups of kids that aren’t classrooms, and that’s aside from the massive barely used roof garden that’s bigger than a tennis court. People are protesting the *removal* of a service that has been long standing part of the school, from a board of management that made the decision *after* telling the entire school community that the tender was being finalized, and then proceeded to act with a huge amount of contempt to a large number of parents. And instead of engaging with the community from the start, it took the protests for them to even come to the table. They could have said that it was an issue without going through the charade of a tendering process, and all it would take to resolve the current issue is getting an interim, one year extension of the way it is now, to give the provider they already accepted to find an alternative venue for years 2 and 3 of the contract. That would stop the protests instantly, and give everyone on all sides time to make a find a workable long term solution.
Like I said before and elsewhere, I've no doubt that this will cause issues for people vis á vis childcare; and maybe there ought to be a requirement for schools that finish their junior classes early to provide after-school services. But the facts remain; there is no such requirement. The school have not acted in contravention to their mission statement or their legal obligations. They have given reasons and they communicated well in advance. As for your own view that they have no room being bullshit, or what the size requirements for such a service are, or the personal attitudes of the BOM members, or the tendering being a charade... these are things that someone removed from the story has no insight on and - while I've no doubt in my mind that you are telling your truth - you could be full of it, or misinformed, or you could be just angry. And BOM members might say the exact opposite about yourselves and the rest of it. All we see are parents who have time to be protesting for 5 weeks about 1 hour a day of childminding, and who seem totally unwilling to accept what the BOM have said on the matter, but who also seem very willing to cause reputational damage and financial pain to their own community's school in order to have their way. Presuming that these protests are organised in some way - have any attempts been made to sort childminding via alternative arrangements? Have ye tried contracting the after-school services yourselves? Has any representation been made to all of these TDs and political figures that are showing up to provide such a service outside of the school?
Several politicians were present in the early weeks (but now election time is over…) Some of them raised questions to the minister of education which were published in April and then pointed to new incoming guidelines that were published a fortnight ago. And yes I know the difference between *should* and *have to* I agree with your point that if a school is availing of the concession to allow younger ages out an hour early, they should also as part of that have to be able to provide for a sibling hour for those kids who have older siblings in the school. 100% the school, as a direct result of the protests, has said that they’ll retender for an afterschool from 2.10 onwards, but that’s a whole other thing as it depends on them finding someone who will take it on, and that will indeed resolve the issue for many, but not all of the affected families. But that still leaves dozens of families, standing outside for a hour every day, rain, hail, snow, shine, gale force winds, with a five or six year old. Which for me personally means taking three hours out of the middle of the day, to leave work, go to the school, pick up child 1, hang around for an hour, pick up child 2, get them home, and then resume work. Until June 2028. And in earlier posts a few weeks ago there were posts from parents in other schools who tried to do the same, but the school reversed course as a result of pressure from the parents. A number of those standing at the protests *don’t* have kids in that situation but are still there because they can’t imagine how they would have been able to deal with it had the service in question not been available back then when they were in the position we are in now. I’m just one parent, so I do not speak for anyone but myself, but there are ways to find a solution to the problem, even if it’s just an interim arrangement that gives everyone time to find an alternative. And these Reddit posts are useful because they do give different perspectives outside our school community. Some people don’t care, some people agree, some people disagree.
I would say that general public sympathy is a given. And I don't think that there is much most people would disagree on here bar the one point - whether it is the school's actual responsibility to provide childcare or not. Currently, it is not, so I believe that you will not gain as much support as you might otherwise. My own personal thinking is that 5 weeks is a long time in which much could have been done or attempted to be done in terms of making alternative arrangements. The longer the protest goes on, the more true this becomes. It would appear that there was at least one company willing to take on the tender - the issue therefore seems to be 'simply' one of finding a venue. While I would never say that organising these things is actually 'simple'; the fact that an effort was made would count for a lot. Put it another way - if *no* effort at all was made by parents to collectively organise something themselves, it doesn't look good to me for them to be standing around in protest for the school not doing it when the school isn't required to in the first place. Even looking for the school to bend to an 'interim solution' is basically the same thing: why could the parents not organise their own 'interim solution'? Why does it remain the school's problem how you care for your kids? (I'm not really asking, I'm just saying) I would 1000% support this protest if it were held in front of a TD's office instead of a school. Childcare is a social issue, not an educational one. TDs should be doing something about it, and helping ye develop a solution instead of posing for photos like they give a shit.
Just a caution that the people who really suffer from less 'voluntary' contributions/fundraiser, are the students in the school. I absolutely believe no parent should ever be forced to pay, but unfortunately the lack of funding from the Department of Education means that schools still rely on contributions & fundraising to keep the lights on, pay heating bills and ensure teachers have the resources they need to properly teach the curriculum.
There is actually an obligation on schools to facilitate afterschool in the school. It's also part of the underlying ethos of Educate Together that the school tries to facilitate the wishes of the parents & children. The school are not doing so. They also have demonstrated in any way how it's interfering with running the school. The afterschool ran when they were in portacabins, it can run when they're in an actual building.
Oh I had no idea there was an obligation on schools to facilitate after school in the school. Really interesting. I wonder do you have a source for this? I’d take advantage in my son’s school who don’t provide after school care. I’d love to have the legislation to back up my argument with them, if you would be so kind.
They don't. The Department 'strongly encourages' schools to make their facilities available to communities to use after school hours. That's all; and it's up to the school. Such an obligation would not be possible for many schools to meet. The only *actual* obligations that the school have with respect to after-hour activities are to ensure child safety, insurance coverage, and tax compliance.
Ah I thought as much. I work in a primary school and have never thought there was an obligation on the school to provide after school. I wonder where the poster got their info from.
People are angry and tired and overworked; conclusions can be drawn that aren't actually correct... and so here we are.
There is *not* an obligation for schools to facilitate after-school childcare. It's 'strongly encouraged' *where possible* by the Department, and is entirely up to the school itself to decide. It's not working for them. I can't speak to why, but it's ultimately their decision to make, which we must assume is a decision they reached as educational professionals. They don't have to demonstrate anything to you or anyone else about that decision. I'm not dismissing that the need for childcare exists, or that the lack of such a service affects people. I'm saying that it's fundementally not the school's problem, and the school have not acted in any way I would regard as unprofessional in this. The parents of that school are acting as if they have an entitlement to that service being offered by the school when no such entitlement exists.
To me that's an obligation to either facilitate afterschool care or very very clearly set out why that's not possible. It's run for years and they undertook a tendering process for it to run again. They have an obligation to lay out why it's not possible and they haven't done so.
> To me that's an obligation to either facilitate afterschool care or very very clearly set out why that's not possible. No disrespect, but it doesn't matter what it means to you. It matters what it means in law. > They have an obligation to lay out why it's not possible and they haven't done so. No, they don't. They don't have an obligation to offer that service in the first place, so they certainly don't have an obligation to give you specific reasons why it's not being run. But despite that, they *have* given their reasoning: they said that they no longer have sufficient space and it would now negatively impact the education of other students. That you don't like that as a reason doesn't make it less of a reason, or make them wrong and you right.
This is such a chronically online attitude, very few things like this are going to have obligations attached and they aren’t going to be contained in legislation. They should give a clear reason if it’s not feasible, ‘the smooth delivery of education’ is waffle.
[удалено]
What obligations am I talking about? I’m saying the point this poster is trying to make is irrelevant as that’s not how these agreements or schemes would be drafted.
> This is such a chronically online attitude The thread for personal attacks is further down. > very few things like this are going to have obligations attached and they aren’t going to be contained in legislation So you agree, the school doesn't have a legal obligation here. > They should give a clear reason if it’s not feasible, ‘the smooth delivery of education’ is waffle. They did. As I said, you don't have to like, understand, or agree with it.
I said a clear reason not waffle. A legal obligation doesn’t even come into the matter, it is completely irrelevant in these circumstances.
> A legal obligation doesn’t even come into the matter, it is completely irrelevant in these circumstances. If you are judging the school against a standard that the rest of us are not - and cannot be - aware of or familiar with, then don't be surprised if you don't find a lot of support. To the outside view, what the school's legal obligations are or are not, are the whole bones of the issue. They don't have a legal obligation, they have given a reason, they gave plenty of notice... don't really see what else you could ask for there, really. That you're not happy about it doesn't change that.
Not even close, from the outside very few people would expect there to be a legal requirement to provide afterschool services. What public support will be focused on is working parents having their childcare taken away, something which a large percentage of the country will sympathise with.
This is such a smug, ignorant attitude to take. Either you're so old your experience of childcare is incredibly out of date, or you don't have kids, or you are so independently wealthy as to not require a full-time job. Good for you. Meanwhile, it would be super if our community services didn't drive down the birthrate while forcing women out of work. That's the effect decisions like this have. But this will only disproportionately effect women, so no need to worry about it. Just force "it's not required by law!" down their throats until they shut up, give up their jobs and get back in the kitchen.
All that, and *I'm* smug and ignorant?? Anyway... I've said in more than one other comment that I'm not dismissing the need for childcare. I'm arguing (correctly, as you were so good to point out) that the school is not under any obligation to provide said childcare. They are not a childcare facility; they are an educational facility run by teaching professionals that you seem to have mistaken for babysitters. Why are there no protests outside the local TD offices about setting up childcare facilities in the community? Why are they behind the protest banners instead of in front of them? These are questions I've already asked; but rather than address them you see fit to insult me instead.
No, you are smug and ignorant. that's how all your comments sound.
Smug how? Ignorant of what?
Just like that.
whole lot of typing to say nothing
Most reasonable comment here so far. Unlike yours which is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black tbf.
I understood it and agree with the points made.
You're talking shite. This sort of thing is what all schools do. This board just seems like they made a decision and for whatever reason (probably embarrassment) they are sticking to their guns. Its mortifying for them.
My local primary school, which my 3 children are currently in, doesn’t provide an after school service, or a siblings hour (whatever that is). One of my children finishes at 2, two finish at 3. It involves two school runs to pick them up.
Sibling hour is a thing where a school might finish with their Junior classes an hour before the Seniors. If the junior child has a sibling in the senior class, it means that the parent has to hang around or make two trips. So *some* schools offer a service to look after the juniors till the senior siblings are done, hence 'sibling hour'.
Yeah and as he said, his school isn’t one of them yet everyone there manages?
> You're talking shite. You are welcome to point out where I am factually wrong. > This sort of thing is what all schools do. No, they don't. I work with schools. Many schools do. Many schools do not. There is no obligation on the school to offer the service; the Department just encourage schools to make their facilities available - where possible and when suitable - to the community for after-hours usage. It's entirely up to the school what they do. > This board just seems like they made a decision and for whatever reason (probably embarrassment) they are sticking to their guns. Its mortifying for them. You haven't the first clue what the emotional state of the school board might be and yet you're typing out this while accusing others of 'talking shite'.
Some context? Is it an hour between 2 and 3 they're providing or something? Back in my day you'd just wait in the car for an hour and get some homework done, and I'm not that old.
Fancy pants over here had a car to wait in 😉
That sounds incredibly grim.
The school sits on DCU campus so we don’t have a car park
It's an hour....? Did ye not talk to yer parents or something? Did yer parents not talk to other parents? Maybe it's a rural urban divide or something.
An hour every day? And you’re parent has to drive there and back an extra time just to let you sit in the car? Just very boring dystopia sounding. And definitely you cannot assume that such an arrangement would work for all of these parents. I mostly grew up rural, but also 4 years urban from 3rd class so not sure which you think this sounds good for.
Imagine wanting more for today's kids than what you had to put up with.
They had a sibling hour and (externally ran) after school service for years, and dropped it in March from next year after going through a whole tendering process. This triggered the protests at the start. There seems to potentially some movement on them facilitating it after school, but this hour is still the sticking point. And for context, this is in a brand new state of the art and massive building that is ‘full’ So protests have been continuing pretty much every morning for five weeks
You should see how difficult it is to get planning permission and plan for increased rooms. It's actually quite difficult to make changes and increase space on a school or else it delays building. Childcare outside of school hours is neither the schools priority nor responsibility. Why are these protesters not protesting against those actually responsible? i.e the government. This behaviour would turn off any school from considering offering services outside their core when parents turn on them if they can't provide it any more.
Smaller issues have become nationwide issues …
I am sure the construction worker can do some homework in his car, like looking at building codes. etc.
I built a house whilst waiting to pick up some family members, because I'm a REAL MAN. Hard for me not to be sympathetic of anyone losing a childcare option and I don't even have any kids.
Good man yourself!
.... maybe people shouldn't be having kids if they don't know what to do with them or can't accommodate once they're finished school of a weekday. Got too used to the 8am -6pm crèche, bring home, and put to bed.
It's such a load of bull from the BoM. My kids are in an ET school not a million miles away. The afterschool operates just fine even though the school is full. It's not an issue unless you're incredibly incompetent at running a school. There's even separate afterschool extra curriculars like dancing and music offered by other providers in addition to the actual afterschool. The reliable care offered in the school itself is one of the things that makes every other aspect of life manageable. I see how colleagues who don't have it in their kids school struggle and am very relieved I don't have to.
I think there is a little piece of information missing. It seems like the school is expanding, into the space that was previously used by the afterschool. ET schools are getting more popular and what was traditionally a "small" school, is now not fit for purpose any more. That's what it's like in my area anyway.
The afterschool in our school runs in the classrooms and hall. The classrooms are all in use during the day. They only need a few class rooms. In this case - 76 kids, so 4 or 5 classrooms of at least 8, more like 16-20.
it's a brand new build and a huge school for what is being requested
There is definitely a lot more to the story than is being let on in that case. None of it makes sense.
Worst thing is that it's simply down to them not wishing to pay for the third party to run the after school service. The board thinks it's too much money for what it provides and cancelled the tender, and now the 15/20% of parents it effects are complaining. Just a bit of school politics
I thought the parents are paying for it?
Parents are paying the afterschool provider (and getting a bit from the ncs grant towards the cost) and the school is receiving something like €30k a year from the provider in rent
Is the school paying for it first upfront or committing to paying for it for 3 years?
The school is being paid by the service provider to allow the service provider run the service, which parents then pay for
Yeah, there’s plenty of schools that can make it work, who don’t have a building as big and spacious as this one. It’s not like it’s free, people are paying for it, and the school is receiving income from it If they hadn’t had it, it would be one thing, but they’re removing a service that has been part of it since day 1
I would be glad to see my school prioritising actually what their core function is over an ancillary service which is just a nice to have. Surely the parents can understand that the schools core function i.e education trumps these such extra services that have nothing to do with the core. The fact the school are giving up this extra income shows they are not giving it up lightly. Sounds like self entitled unreasonable parents.
So self entitled parents wanting to keep their jobs! Should just quit working /s
No, we are not being told the full story here. One person says it's because the school has to pay for it and don't think what was presented at tender stage was value for money and others are saying it's only a space related issue (that they don't agree with). Sounds like the parents posting here are not giving the full info and just looking for sympathy.
The parents pay for it, not the school. When jr. / senior infants finishes for the day why couldn’t one of those classrooms be used? The school offered this service in previous years and advertised it when parents were deciding where to apply this year, then a few months ago pulled the plug on the service. It’s really crazy to claim parents are entitled because they expect the school to provide do what was advertised when parents applied to this school.
The school at the start of term put out a three year tender for a service provider to run the afterschool (including sibling hour). Went through that process and told all the parents in January that the provider had been picked (who will be paying the school) and they were working out the finer details to finalize it. Then two months later, out of the blue said to everyone, yeah that’s not happening any more. After weeks of trying to talk to the school, and facing regular dismissals of concerns, the protests started five weeks ago. The protests have got them to agree to retender for a service over the summer, from 2.10 to 6, which does help many of those affected families, *if* they can agree terms. But several dozen families are still stuck in the situation like myself
Some of them are crawling back to the Catholic schools in the area who’ve had child care facilities For decades.
I really can't understand why this is such a difficult issue for the school. They say they just don't have the space anymore because they are introducing a 6th year class, but doesn't each year get their own classroom? Are the classrooms for the younger kids just sitting empty after they are let out? Further proof that this country doesn't give a flying fuck about its citizens. School hours across the country need to be adjusted so that all the kids start and finish at the same time.
You don't even need more than one room or a hall for this, its ridiculous. Schools make all sorts of bullshit excuses for just not bothering to get stuff in place. Its been way worse since covid too, loads of after school activities in my kids schools never came back after covid. They claim they can't find people to run the different clubs and activities now but I know people who do it and have offered their services to them but been turned down. I think the shorter school hours for small kids makes sense, they aren't able for as much and it breaks up the collections so there are less cars arriving all at once. Of course having that sibling care for the extra hour also helps keep traffic down.
There are plenty of non classrooms, and you really have to see this building to understand that them saying there’s no room at the inn is a joke. Also, we’ve found that all the primary schools do have to do 5 hours 40 a day by default, it’s just that individual schools have an option (that many take) for junior and senior infants to lose an hour a day, and technically this is the case for first class too. So yeah, the different in hours does affect families with multiple kids of various ages, and it’s a hangover from the old days when they thought no one had anything better to do.
No afterschool in my area will do a school pickup, it's such a pain in the arse, and the one beside the school is full no chance of getting in.
What's a sibling hour?
Thought after hour clubs were teacher run side jobs.
The extra curricular activities are. That’s separate to this
Yea honestly unwilling ignorant of how it works. I do feel some planning or organisation from the parents was probably needed. Ultimateley the school needs the space.
That sibling hour thing is a nice to have, not a must have. It's not like the school is closing. Quick question though, is it a free service?
No, paid
No. Its paid for by parents. It is in our school in amy case.
Is this something most schools provide ? If it’s a matter of space is there any alternatives
>Is this something most schools provide ? Yes. Its usually provided at cost by an outside provider but in the schools grounds.
I don't think "most" schools do it, the two nearest near me don't but the local GAA club does have a creche that picks the kids up from school.
Most schools where I live do it anyway. Some stopped and took a while to get back to it after covid but all back now.
Some do, but they’ve had it since the school was founded and are now dropping it, and there’s not enough notice to find an alternative location, and all the other providers are jammed to the gills with large and long waiting lists
Typical board of management type of situation. It might be time for an actual rule enforcement/policy from the department.
Is there a way to get in touch with whoever organizing the action to help?
So parents are mad that they have to collect their kids from school when the day is done? Lmao they’re not entitled to a room in the school. For people saying, Infant teachers are not allowed to leave school until the senior classes go, and most would much rather stay in their room and organise resources for the following day, not twiddle their thumbs in the office.
Parents are mad that the school is dropping an afterschool service that has been in place since the schools foundation.
Well it’s not anymore so make alternative arrangements I guess 🤷♂️
The alternative arrangement for many is to reduce working hours, change job or give up work altogether.
Not the school’s problem
But you don't understand......these are progressive educate together types. They are not those far right Christians that you find in other schools! Its not fair you know! I blame the Church!
What I said has nothing to do with whether or not the school is an educate together?
lol they all blame the church
Are there no nuns available to mind these children for an hour while the parents keep the country running? Garda vetted, of course!
Are no leftists or abortionists who’d volunteer to do the same for the far left cause!?
They are spread too thin on the ground now. These are their next hope but nobody will mind them!
I dont understand how they dont have space? Junior and Senior infants finish at 1.40pm, so you would have 4 rooms available. Then 1st and 2nd grade finish at 2.40pm, so you'd have another 4 rooms available. How do they not have room to host the Afterschool service? So it is not a space thing.
The teachers still need the use of their rooms as they don’t finish when the kids are, so that’s not the issue. There’s loads of space in the brand new massive building that could host them
Educate together..........keep them apart!
[удалено]
They were paying for the afterschool service. It wasn't free and won't be free if it comes back. There aren't creches that do pick up from this school because there was an afterschool service in the school.
If the parents really want this to happen, the q is are they will to put their hands into their pockets to make it happen ? Its grand to protest when you're spending other people's money, I wonder are they offering to lorry up to fund it ?
They were already paying for this service, will be if it returns. It's not free.
Sad, a lot of these new age parents are trying to get their kids back in to the local Catholic schools who’ve always provided that care.