Branded school uniforms

[Cloud Strife]

I've just read this very interesting article on BBC News: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgp08ln84no

Planned changes to school uniform policy will affect over four million pupils across England, according to new estimates from the Department for Education (DfE). The government says seven in 10 secondary schools and 35% of primary schools in England will have to reduce the number of compulsory branded items to three, plus a branded tie for secondary students. The new rule is part of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which still has several parliamentary stages to go through before becoming a law. The government says families will save money, but school wear manufacturers warn the plans could end up costing them more.

...

The current government wants to go further, by limiting the number of items unique to a school that have to be bought from designated suppliers. The government claims parents will save around £50 per child through the school uniform measures, which it hopes to introduce in September 2026. But uniform retailers warn that the planned changes might increase costs for families. The Schoolwear Association says the plans could mean parents spend more on replacing lower-quality generic garments which might not last as long as branded items. They say branded uniforms also play a role in reducing inequality in schools and improving behaviour.

What struck me here is that there's simply no excuse for branded school uniforms. The manufacturers are claiming that their garments are higher quality, but in reality, they're often made from low quality materials. There are plenty of examples where an identical item is available from a supermarket, and the only justification for a dramatically higher price is that it has a logo attached. To me, this is nothing short of a racket, and it's especially obvious when there's a single supplier of branded uniform items. How can it even be justified to have a single monopoly supplier in this day and age? Of course, the reality is that uniforms are also a source of profits for schools, as well as keeping the poorer kids out of the school.

I also find the "branded uniforms reduce inequality and improve behaviour" to be complete nonsense. While we can argue about school uniforms, I think it's clear that there's not going to be any difference in behaviour whether someone is wearing a plain blue jumper from Tesco as opposed to a plain blue jumper with a small school logo attached.

I've seen how this works on the inside, as a friend is a deputy head teacher in a typical English high school. The school receives around 20% of the cost of the uniform, while in return, the single supplier has a five year exclusivity agreement. While it's not in the official agreement between the school and the supplier, the reality is that the school has agreed not to allow any items other than those from the supplier, and uniform checks are frequently carried out to preserve a rather good source of income. The management are against it, but the trust behind the academy implemented this over the head of the school. In essence, the strict uniform policy is not about any sort of behaviour, but rather about the fact that the school budget is inflated with the uniform money, and as my friend says, there's probably someone in the trust who received a nice kickback for it as well.

But the mystery to me: why doesn't the government simply ban it completely? A branded tie is fine, and logos can be made available to attach to blazers/jumpers/etc, but there's really no excuse for requiring a specific branded blazer or trousers.

 

[AlterEgo]

I've found this bizarre too.

When I was a lad (zzzzz...25+ years ago now) I started at a prestigious boys' grammar school which had a uniform requirement of black blazer, black trousers, white shirt and black shoes, along with a school tie.

The official blazer with integrated badge sewn into the material cost a small fortune but any shop bought black single breasted blazer was acceptable, and a school badge could be sewn on as a patch, available for something like £4. I can't stress enough how little anyone there cared whether you had the expensive fancy blazer with integrated badge or cheap Tesco one with a badge sewn on yourself (yes, yourself! My mum taught me!).

This was a school mostly populated by privileged children, despite it being a free grammar school, as it was selective and there was an entrance exam for which many boys received coaching from helicopter parents. So it was very middle class.

The only official uniform items were a school tie and the badge. An optional plain black unbranded jumper was acceptable to wear under the blazer, and the shirt could be any white shirt.

As one of a handful of boys admitted both outside the county catchment (thanks to a 99th percentile 12-plus score), and one of maybe 20 in my whole year from a recognisably working class background (my dad was a train driver and my mum at the time worked in a shop), I found absolutely no issue fitting in. It was an excellent school which treated everyone fairly.

Times seem to have moved on a lot; much less prestigious schools are now feeling much more like the army, with more exacting uniform requirements.

 

[Egg Centric]

I also find the "branded uniforms reduce inequality and improve behaviour" to be complete nonsense. While we can argue about school uniforms, I think it's clear that there's not going to be any difference in behaviour whether someone is wearing a plain blue jumper from Tesco as opposed to a plain blue jumper with a small school logo attached.

Well of course, but they need to come up with "something" and since there's essentially no justification at all other than the thin one of it providing the school revenue they had to get creative.

I also don't understand the 3 exception. That's a blazer, skirt, and trousers. Massive loophole.

 

[sor]

I don't have kids, but from what I've heard from parents it seems like things have changed massively from when I was at school. My primary school had no mandatory branded items, while the secondary school did require a tie but it was cheap enough and of course could last the whole five years if looked after. Both offered branded jumpers should you be unable to find truly unbranded items (this being before online shopping, or at least the trivial thing it is today).

I vaguely remember the secondary school having an arrangement with the hoity-toity uniform shop - I remember going there once and noticing their uniforms for the local fee paying schools - but it was by no means required to use them. They were even nice enough to allow black unbranded trainers (and the head would have a rant every 6 months about how most ignored the branding rule, though never did anything about it). Certainly most of my stuff came from the likes of ASDA...

 

[Peter Mugridge]

We always ignored the mandatory supplier and found generic identical items in shops like Primark.

The schools could never tell the difference... the quality was usually higher anyway.

OK, we couldn't do that for things with the school logo on ( I'm sure when I was at school in the 1970s the badges were supplied as sew-on ones??? ) but most parents just pass on items that haven't been ruined when their kids grow out of them so very few people were spending anything much even on those.

 

[PeterC]

I recall my aunt being in a dispute with her local secondary school when my cousin started in about 1960. She had bought an inexpensive pleated skirt in the correct shade of grey from a local shop. Apparently it had the wrong number of pleats, she was supposed to travel to the town centre and buy an expensive one from the correct supplier.

In the 60s my own headmaster upset Debenhams by changing the uniform code and abolishing caps for older boys. It left the store with a stock of special 6th form and school team caps. I think the stock had been there from before the store was taken over has hardly anybody upgraded their caps as they grew older.

Apart from caps, tie and a distinctive blue blazer nothing else was branded and a limited range of colours allowed for shirts and sweaters. Just after I left caps were abolished for younger boys and there was a switch to black blazers. Now boys wear a generic black blazer with badge but sweaters sports and PE kit are all branded

 

[gg1]

My senior school experience in the late 80s/early 90s echoes other comments, school tie was mandatory along with black trousers, white or pale blue shirt, blazers were optional, jumpers if worn had to be plain dark grey woollen v necks. Aside from the tie and sew on patch for the blazer, nothing was branded. I don't recall there being any uniform requirements for PE kits and at my primary school there was no uniform requirement at all.

There were a couple of shops in the area which specialised in school uniforms but everything there was generic and unbranded and it's safe to assume they were reasonably priced, my parents wouldn't have bought my uniforms from there if not.

Personally I'm strongly in favour of uniforms, strongly against any branding other than ties and patches.

 

[dcbwhaley]

I've found this bizarre too.

When I was a lad (zzzzz...25+ years ago now) I started at a prestigious boys' grammar school which had a uniform requirement of black blazer, black trousers, white shirt and black shoes, along with a school tie.

The official blazer with integrated badge sewn into the material cost a small fortune but any shop bought black single breasted blazer was acceptable, and a school badge could be sewn on as a patch, available for something like £4. I can't stress enough how little anyone there cared whether you had the expensive fancy blazer with integrated badge or cheap Tesco one with a badge sewn on yourself (yes, yourself! My mum taught me!).

This was a school mostly populated by privileged children, despite it being a free grammar school, as it was selective and there was an entrance exam for which many boys received coaching from helicopter parents. So it was very middle class.

The only official uniform items were a school tie and the badge. An optional plain black unbranded jumper was acceptable to wear under the blazer, and the shirt could be any white shirt.

As one of a handful of boys admitted both outside the county catchment (thanks to a 99th percentile 12-plus score), and one of maybe 20 in my whole year from a recognisably working class background (my dad was a train driver and my mum at the time worked in a shop), I found absolutely no issue fitting in. It was an excellent school which treated everyone fairly.

Times seem to have moved on a lot; much less prestigious schools are now feeling much more like the army, with more exacting uniform requirements.

I went to a similar school (66 years ago)in similar circumstances which had the same black blazer, black trousers, white shirt and black shoes. We were obliged to wear a branded tie and branded cap: six formers were allowed not to wear the hat.

 

[Cloud Strife]

I also don't understand the 3 exception. That's a blazer, skirt, and trousers. Massive loophole.

I can't make sense of it either. There's really no reason to continue to have exceptions, because it's obvious that the schools using it as a profit centre will simply pick the high ticket items and ditch the ones where ridiculous profit margins can't be extracted. Keeping "branded" items means they'll simply go for a tie, blazer and trousers and laugh all the way to the bank.

Times seem to have moved on a lot; much less prestigious schools are now feeling much more like the army, with more exacting uniform requirements.

The general thing in England is that the more aggressive the uniform policy, the more likely the school has some exclusivity deal with a supplier in exchange for kickbacks. I've seen this time and time again, where a school has brought in a sole supplier and simultaneously started to enforce a very draconian policy involving kids being hassled for not having things like tiny logos on their trousers. And of course, there are also draconian punishments associated with "uniform violations", including putting kids in isolation until the correct uniform is obtained.

There are also other major ethical concerns: many of these exclusive suppliers are very reluctant to tell the truth about where the uniforms actually come from. My friend is involved in a large battle with her child's school, and one of the things that they've uncovered is that the supplier is likely using one of those sweatshops in Bangladesh, but they're going to quite extraordinary lengths to conceal this.

 

[Yew]

So this seems to have became more of an issue since the general move from blazers to sweaters. But is there also a factor of the increasing private interests in the education system, in the form of Academies?

 

[Harpo]

Schools are already onto the workarounds. One local school is specifying a single supplier’s skirt in a bizarre tartan (in England!) but of course it has no logo.

All part of schools living in a private little bubble that picks and chooses when it engages with parents.

 

[Kite159]

The school my nephew goes to has to wear branded polo shirts at £20 a shirt. The quality of the top is rubbish, a supermarket/Primark polo shirt is better quality.

 

[Zomboid]

I'm grateful that my daughter's school don't insist on branding. You can buy one if you like, and if not then a dark blue jumper/ cardigan will do fine.

 

[yorkie]

They should get rid of blazers. I suspect they are used by some schools as a means to deter poorer students from attending.

Near me, some students are being denied entry to their catchment school, where the cost of a jumper is £18.00 – £21.75 and instead being forced to attend a school further away that is not their catchment school, which demands that blazers costing £34.99 are purchased. I don't know if those prices are reasonable or how they compare to other schools; these are just examples I looked up online. Both are branded.

(Their catchment school reduced its allocation a year or two ago, while the other school expanded and increased their allocation a few years prior; demand for the schools is broadly the same, but one school has significantly more 'capacity' than the other, with the excess capacity filled by 2nd/3rd choice applications).

 

[Old Yard Dog]

I went to a Grammar School in Bradford where we had to wear bespoke herringbone suits - in the 6th form! It was eventually downgraded to a co-ed comprehensive before closing down due to the dwindling number of Catholic kids in the city.

 

[jp4712]

I utterly applaud this move. I went to the Grammar School In the 1970s, all very middle class except me, the working class kid, with my parents scrimping and saving for the branded kit the school insisted on. It was pure snobbery. Yes schools will try to find loopholes, but I think that reflects badly on them. Bring the new rules on, I say.

 

[Yew]

They should get rid of blazers. I suspect they are used by some schools as a means to deter poorer students from attending.

Near me, some students are being denied entry to their catchment school, where the cost of a jumper is £18.00 – £21.75 and instead being forced to attend a school further away that is not their catchment school, which demands that blazers costing £34.99 are purchased. I don't know if those prices are reasonable or how they compare to other schools; these are just examples I looked up online. Both are branded.

I think over the course of my time in secondary school, I had two blazers. Whereas I would anticipate that jumpers would be more likely to have a shorter lifespan?

 

[GatwickDepress]

I think over the course of my time in secondary school, I had two blazers. Whereas I would anticipate that jumpers would be more likely to have a shorter lifespan?

My school converted to an academy and introduced blazers after I left, but the quality of them was absolutely dire. The badge came loose in no time at all and I'd have to sew the sleeves of my sister's blazer up at the shoulder every few months where the stitching went. It was quite a loose fit and other families complained about them too, so I can't blame it on her either!

The polo shirt and jumper/vest generally lasted a very long time and seemed pretty good quality for the price (about £8 for a polo shirt if I recall), but those £30-£35 blazers were atrocious. They might even be up to £40 now.

 

[ABB125]

I've had a look at the uniform requirements of my high school (which I attended 2015-2020, including sixth form).

For boys:

• Branded blazer
• Generic smart white shirt
• Specific tie design
• Generic smart black/charcoal trousers
• Generic smart black shoes
• (optional) branded pullover/jumper

For girls:

• Branded blazer
• Specific blouse design
• Specific tie design
• Branded skirt or branded trousers
• Generic smart black shoes
• (optional) branded pullover/jumper

PE kit:

• Branded polo shirt
• (boys) branded rugby shirt
• Specific design shorts or skort (girls)
• Specific design socks
• Assorted other optional branded items for specific sports

Sixth form uniform was essentially the same for boys, and a different skirt for girls.

Ultimately I don't think this is a particularly onerous uniform list compared with some schools. On the whole boys get a better deal with more generic items being acceptable. I think the branded jumper thing is relatively new, when I was there I'm pretty sure any V-neck navy jumper was acceptable (for boys, at least). Uniform policy was officially very strict, though in practise most teachers would turn a blind eye to "minor" issues. Off the top of my head, blazers were around £40, ties under £10, not sure about the girls' blouse although I seem to recall it being a bit contentious that boys could wear any generic shirt but girls had to wear the official blouse. Blazers and ties would typically last your entire time at the school (especially given that this is in one of the few remaining 3-tier school areas, so only years 9-11 (plus sixth form)) if you didn't mistreat them, I think I had the same blazer for all 5 years I was there. Same for the PE kit. The main reason for having to replace stuff was either a growth spurt, or you were the kind of person who severely mistreated your uniform.
I think the uniform changed slightly during my older brother's first year of attendance (possibly just the logo changing), but this only applied to new intake - existing uniforms were also acceptable until those wearers had finished at the school.

I've just had a look at the official supplier website, a blazer is £30-£50 depending on what size you get (which is interesting, as clothing typically is the same price regardless of size, at least it is for the things I buy!) so looks like prices are still similar to 10 years ago. PE kit polo shirt around £20, rugby shirt around £27. Blouses approaching £30 each - I can see why this was contentious! However, you could probably find some sort of generic supplier with a good deal of searching, the blouses aren't branded just a specific pinstripe design.

Personally, I think a branded blazer (with sew-on option available as well as the pre-made one) and, if it's deemed necessary to wear one, a branded tie, should be the maximum for normal uniform requirements: everything else should be generic, anything from the usual big-name clothing stores that meets the description should be fine. For PE kit, I'd allow a general purpose branded shirt, but everything else generic.

 

[styles]

When I was a kid, I moved from Northumberland to Flintshire.

In my old school in Northumberland, we had strict uniform criteria.

In my new school in Flintshire, there was no uniform.

My personal observation was actually that the clothes-based bullying was worse in the uniform school. Having a uniform almost drew attention to the remaining areas where you had freedom, from the number of strips visible on your tie to whether your all-black shoes were Rockport ('rockies') or not.

So personally I do not buy this uniform idea about bullying. Nor do I feel it prepares people for the world of work any more as so few places actually have uniforms. Heck even my local Tesco uses non-uniform bods with a badge. I have not worn a uniform in the 10+ years since graduating. It's just not a reality for most people any more. Also frankly you don't need 7 years of training to wear a uniform, it's a very poor excuse.

I'm not totally against uniform, but I am against some of the strictness. You see headteachers kicking off that socks are navy instead of black and you just think well probably their parents can't afford new black socks, and it makes absolutely zero difference to their learning, so just move on. In fact, getting on their case only serves to add to their existing stress.

If you're going to have a uniform, it needs to be flexible enough to be affordable to people on lower incomes, and it needs to not be so prescriptive that it draws attention to the differences. Unfortunately I feel a lot of schools focus so much on uniform believing it to be some magic bullet to behaviour problems, but fail to tackle the root cause.

 

[Zomboid]

When I was a kid, I moved from Northumberland to Flintshire.

In my old school in Northumberland, we had strict uniform criteria.

In my new school in Flintshire, there was no uniform.

My personal observation was actually that the clothes-based bullying was worse in the uniform school. Having a uniform almost drew attention to the remaining areas where you had freedom, from the number of strips visible on your tie to whether your all-black shoes were Rockport ('rockies') or not.

So personally I do not buy this uniform idea about bullying. Nor do I feel it prepares people for the world of work any more as so few places actually have uniforms. Heck even my local Tesco uses non-uniform bods with a badge. I have not worn a uniform in the 10+ years since graduating. It's just not a reality for most people any more. Also frankly you don't need 7 years of training to wear a uniform, it's a very poor excuse.

I'm not totally against uniform, but I am against some of the strictness. You see headteachers kicking off that socks are navy instead of black and you just think well probably their parents can't afford new black socks, and it makes absolutely zero difference to their learning, so just move on. In fact, getting on their case only serves to add to their existing stress.

If you're going to have a uniform, it needs to be flexible enough to be affordable to people on lower incomes, and it needs to not be so prescriptive that it draws attention to the differences. Unfortunately I feel a lot of schools focus so much on uniform believing it to be some magic bullet to behaviour problems, but fail to tackle the root cause.

Things like a colour scheme and rules like "no trainers" (a huge source of bullying at my primary school) along with a general "dress smartly" instruction ought to be enough really.

But kids can be horrible, and bullies will always find something. I remember being ridiculed because of my haircut, which was almost identical to what the person doing the ridiculing had on top of their head...

 

[styles]

Things like a colour scheme and rules like "no trainers" (a huge source of bullying at my primary school) along with a general "dress smartly" instruction ought to be enough really.

But kids can be horrible, and bullies will always find something. I remember being ridiculed because of my haircut, which was almost identical to what the person doing the ridiculing had on top of their head...

Owen Jones does a whole section in his 'Chavs' book about trainers. I don't agree with him on a lot of things but he is spot on about footwear and the class divide.

You're right though that bullies always find something, and it's fundamentally for this reason which I believe uniforms do not prevent bullying.

As I say, I'm not totally against school uniforms, but I believe their 'positive impact' is massively overplayed.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

One local school is specifying a single supplier’s skirt

Would that single supplier be Trutex and with Tucasi as the only permissible means of paying them...?

That's the set up here - and as per my earlier post, everyone basically ignores it.

 

[aftv]

When I was at secondary school (2019 - 2024) we had to have a Blazer with the schools logo and name on it from the supplier. We also had to have a Tie colour coded based on Year group that we bought once (unless like me yours disappeared in the PE Changing rooms and was never seen again. In which case you had to go to the school supplier and buy a new one) and stuck with as we moved through years, which IMO was a good idea. We also had a set of specific reuquirments for PE Lessons.
I've copied and pasted the uniform requirements from my Secondary Schools website in the table below.

* These must be purchased from the school suplier.

Years 7 - 11​

Blazer *	Regulation royal blue, single breasted with badge.
Skirt	Regulation PLAIN medium grey cloth – two styles available Skirts must be of a modest length: from not more than 15cm/6” above the knee when kneeling down to mid-calf - not ankle length.
Trousers	PLAIN medium grey cloth, straight leg style.
Shirt/Blouse	PLAIN white with collar which can be buttoned up to the neck, suitable for wearing with a tie; long or short sleeved. To be tucked in at all times.
Jumper *	Regulation navy blue V-neck jumper (either long sleeved or sleeveless) – both styles available from the school supplier. No alternative jumpers are to be worn. School jumpers are not to be worn as an alternative to the blazer. This is an optional item.
Tie *	Regulation school tie (coloured stripe according to the Year Group).
Shoes	BLACK plain formal shoes – No trainers, no platforms or stiletto heels.
Tights	Neutral, plain black or navy opaque tights may be worn.
Socks	Plain black or white ankle socks when worn with a skirt.

 

[styles]

When I was at secondary school (2019 - 2024) we had to have a Blazer with the schools logo and name on it from the supplier. We also had to have a Tie colour coded based on Year group that we bought once (unless like me yours disappeared in the PE Changing rooms and was never seen again. In which case you had to go to the school supplier and buy a new one) and stuck with as we moved through years, which IMO was a good idea. We also had a set of specific reuquirments for PE Lessons.
I've copied and pasted the uniform requirements from my Secondary Schools website in the table below.

You say that you think this was a good idea. Can you elaborate on this - what makes you think it was a good idea?

 

[aftv]

You say that you think this was a good idea. Can you elaborate on this - what makes you think it was a good idea?

It saved me from having to buy a new tie every year and it came with the bonus of being able to reckognice year groups based on the colour of their ties which came with the added bonus of being easy to decipher by teachers so we werent fed up with the monotonus drone of being asked which year you where in. When I started Year 7 was a Blue striped tie which we kept until the end of Year 11. The previous years Year 7s where red striped ties ISTR.

 

[styles]

It saved me from having to buy a new tie every year and it came with the bonus of being able to reckognice year groups based on the colour of their ties which came with the added bonus of being easy to decipher by teachers so we werent fed up with the monotonus drone of being asked which year you where in. When I started Year 7 was a Blue striped tie which we kept until the end of Year 11. The previous years Year 7s where red striped ties ISTR.

Interesting - so the usefulness of the tie was basically identification of year? Seems simple enough.

What about the rest of the uniform though - shirt, blazer, trousers, skirt, socks, shoes, etc?

 

[yorkie]

Having a tie based on year is a good idea, as you then at least know who that student's Year Leader is.

If you're going to have a uniform, it needs to be flexible enough to be affordable to people on lower incomes, and it needs to not be so prescriptive that it draws attention to the differences. Unfortunately I feel a lot of schools focus so much on uniform believing it to be some magic bullet to behaviour problems, but fail to tackle the root cause.

It's well known that some schools use uniform policy as a way to deter poorer families from applying for places at their schools.

Sweatshirts dropped for blazers - parents slam school uniform changes

PARENTS have hit out after a York secondary school unveiled plans to change its pupils’ uniforms, including replacing sweatshirts with blazers.

www.yorkpress.co.uk

PARENTS have hit out after a York secondary school unveiled plans to change its pupils’ uniforms, including replacing sweatshirts with blazers.

I play football with someone whose daughter attended that school; his view on the headteacher named in the article, who is now the CEO of the Trust containing that school, is not reproducible here!

 

[aftv]

Interesting - so the usefulness of the tie was basically identification of year? Seems simple enough.

What about the rest of the uniform though - shirt, blazer, trousers, skirt, socks, shoes, etc?

The Blazer had to be bought from the schools supplier and was a nightmare. Too hot in Summer owing to the material its made from which meant by the time we got to May and June they were sending out Emails to parents telling them we didnt have to wear the blazer, and too cold in the winter. Everything else could be bought from any shop and most of my teachers where OK with us having trousers and socks that werent the colour specified by the school. We had to wear dress shoes but they could be from any retailer. Mine where from Clarks. We could wear trainers as long as we had a note from our Head of Year.

 

[yorkie]

The Blazer had to be bought from the schools supplier and was a nightmare. Too hot in Summer owing to the material its made from which meant by the time we got to May and June they were sending out Emails to parents telling them we didnt have to wear the blazer, and too cold in the winter. Everything else could be bought from any shop and most of my teachers where OK with us having trousers and socks that werent the colour specified by the school. We had to wear dress shoes but they could be from any retailer. Mine where from Clarks. We could wear trainers as long as we had a note from our Head of Year.

At sensible schools, blazers are not worn, jumpers are not required from May to July and trainers are fine as long as they are black.

Sadly, the Government is mandating the wrong things; if only they spoke to people who had a clue about the topic.