Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

dudeone

Lunch Lady Fired for Giving Free Lunch to Low-Income Student

63 posts in this topic

She was not fired for giving food to a child. That's a typical sensationalist headline many people here have and will predictably fall for.

She was fired because she didn't follow the rules, and she admitted she would do it again.

She was re-hired because of political correctness and image, and the school was doing some damage control when they were in the right.

It's the mother's fault for not filing the paperwork.

Futhermore, the children for incompetent parents were still given free food just not "meals".

There are plenty of free English/ESL courses throughout the USA, parents just want government doing everything for them.

This is a travesty but the travesty is how many illegal immigrants (likely the situation here) refuse to learn the native language of the country they move to, and in their own stupidity/ignorance are a burden for their children that taxpayers have to make up for.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She was re-hired because of political correctness and image, and the school was doing some damage control when they were in the right.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure they were technically in the right, but they didn't have to jump to firing as the first course of action. They had other options available to them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schools in the US are supposed to, by their state constitutions, be amongst the first for allocated funds but wind up being among the first to get cuts. So typically they are finicky about wasting funds and someone breaking rules at a financial expense of the school (when I worked for a district doing IT after high school, every year I had to go before the board to justify why I was getting paid what I was).. food obviously represents quite an expense. I can't say I'd have fired this person but rest assured not following protocol would have resulted in some serious discipline at minimum. I just hope this was the only student she didn't follow protocol with, and that other children who have parents who can actually fill out paperwork didn't miss out.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how much money schools would save if they didn't have cafeterias period.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schools in the US are supposed to, by their state constitutions, be amongst the first for allocated funds but wind up being among the first to get cuts. So typically they are finicky about wasting funds and someone breaking rules at a financial expense of the school (when I worked for a district doing IT after high school, every year I had to go before the board to justify why I was getting paid what I was).. food obviously represents quite an expense. I can't say I'd have fired this person but rest assured not following protocol would have resulted in some serious discipline at minimum. I just hope this was the only student she didn't follow protocol with, and that other children who have parents who can actually fill out paperwork didn't miss out.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn them!! .. wasting funds by feeding a hungry child .. you would have fit into the Nazi model perfectly with your "rules .. rules that MUST be obeyed at all times" ..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feeding hungry children is admirable (though doing it at school should be redundant in any western welfare state).

Why the need to operate a food service industry for everyone though? Seems odd to subsidize food for everyone especially given the obesity epidemic in children today!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's next? Universal health care?

Whatever happened to FREEDOM?!? As in, freedom to let a kid starve because his mom didn't fill out some papers...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feeding hungry children is admirable (though doing it at school should be redundant in any western welfare state).

Why the need to operate a food service industry for everyone though? Seems odd to subsidize food for everyone especially given the obesity epidemic in children today!

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feeding hungry children is admirable (though doing it at school should be redundant in any western welfare state).

Why the need to operate a food service industry for everyone though? Seems odd to subsidize food for everyone especially given the obesity epidemic in children today!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is children learn much better when they are not hungry/starving .. the sad reality is much of the money going to parents of poor children is being used for cigarettes and junk food .. just go to your local supermarket on "welfare Wednesday" and observe the buying patterns ..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is children learn much better when they are not hungry/starving .. the sad reality is much of the money going to parents of poor children is being used for cigarettes and junk food .. just go to your local supermarket on "welfare Wednesday" and observe the buying patterns ..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What?? Obesity?? This is a healthy lunch provided to make sure kids are well fed so they can concentrate on school studies. It's a great program. Every kid gets a subsidized meal not just low income kids. Read my post above. $1.25 for a complete meal including milk and a piece of fruit (apple, orange or pear etc.) If your family is poor then you don't pay for the meal at all.

My school had every sports team possible, except ice hockey of course. The kids looked bigger than college students here. They were all healthy and well fed. Not like here hanging out in the smoke pit in the back of the school. As a matter of fact we didn't even have a smoke pit.

Edit. Unlike the article posted a few posts above suggests sugary drinks ie coke, soda etc were not available as part of school lunch. Only 2 options, regular milk or chocolate milk. If you wanted to drink pop there was 1 pop machine and 1 snack machine for approximately 2000 students. This was not covered by the school lunch program.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again it was not just the poor families who's children got subsidized meals. If you purchased a meal it would only cost $1.25. It's a federal program to make sure all kids have food in their stomach so they can concentrate on studies.

As far as buying cigarettes etc. in the US you don't get cash, you get food stamps. You are only allowed to buy grocery items with this money. Of course this gets abused and ppl find ways around it but the govt' is attempting to fix this problem.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That the food is healthy or not is irrelevant in the US and even here there's massive shortfalls in education funding. If you don't have enough money for learning why the heck are they spending it on food that their parents should be providing?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how pray tell would that be possible? You name a fix and I can find a workaround in under ten seconds.

All that would really be happening is increasing bureaucracy. If people are going to drink and smoke their welfare away there's nothing you can do to stop that other than cut them off entirely which then simply makes them homeless instead.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low income students? They should get better jobs. Or second ones.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same reason they provide for teacher's pay, books, janitors, counselors and the school building. With your logic should the parents pay for the teacher's pay and books etc??

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.