School trainers only lasted 4 months – worth a claim?

all of my Nike air’s do exactly the same

This is the scene by our door when all the local teens arrive!

Unique bunch eh!!

Back on topic – 4 months is rubbish, but if she’s scuffing adn dragging etc, it’s normal I guess..

DrP

Interesting. Our eldest has just started in year 7 and his school specifically bans Air Force 1’s, citing affordability. It is an academy that caters for pretty wide range socio-economic areas, so I do kind of get this. They are super-strict regarding uniforms generally, with debits for untucked shirts and missing blazers. I do wonder about the point of uniforms in 2024, but if you’re going to have them they probably should be enforced.

Anyway, apologies for the digression.

At my daughters school the af1s are the example picture of what is not allowed. Surprised any allow them with that wacking great tick on the side.

Same here. No trainer style allowed even if all black. Has to be “smart”, no logos, no colour, no decoration like tags or metal bars etc. Makes buying school shoes an absolute nightmare that normally involves being dragged around multiple shopping parks while being repeatedly told how uncool I am by my daughter.

Last summer the boys needed new shoes so we bought 3 pairs from Next, not quite plimsolls but lightweight summer shoes.

All 3 completely fell to bits in about 1 month. We took them back for a refund and went running around the shop to find a manager, every staff member who saw them said “oh wow that’s terrible I’m sure it’ll be fine”.
Manager shows up, took one glance and absolutely did not want to know.

“Look at how worn they are, that’s wear and tear not a failure”

“But they’ve only lasted one month, look at all this splitting round the sides and soles!”

“They’re summer shoes, they’re not meant to be worn all the time.”

“But it’s summer. They haven’t even lasted this summer.”

Nothing doing. Was treated like I was an idiot and trying to scam them or something.

Cool story bro, I know 😁

To put it in context, the large sports retailers spend millions on ‘Back to School’ advertising campaigns, the spend being second only to Christmas. I’ve been involved in design work for one of them (no, not that one) over the last few years

The campaigns feature Air Force 1’s, and other plain black trainers like Adidas Forums (which I ended up buying for Binnerette number 2 last year as we couldn’t get black AF1’s in her size for love nor money). This would suggest that black trainers are the norm in the majority of schools. All the major manufacturers are clearly making a range of plain black trainers specifically for this market

Personally I think a pair of decent trainers make a lot more sense than traditional shoes if, like both my daughters and the OP’s daughter, you’re spending an hour a day walking back and too to school. If I’m going to be walking back and too to work for an hour a day in all weathers, I’m not going to do it in a pair of brogues. Its not 1950. Should they wear a cap and carry a satchel too containing their ration card and a copy of the Beano?

They look like cheap crap fashion trainers to me, but then you look at the price and its scary ! All the big brands appear to have a range of stuff that looks nice but is utter crap

Why dont schools have standards anymore, or does she change in to shoes when she gets there.

Just for reference our lad (13) got through a pair of Clarks shoes in about 4 months. Start rite are much better and we now get nearly a year

Why dont schools have standards anymore

They do. They’re just different standards to when we were at school, though not by much. Its hardly a technicolour free-for-all, is it?

OP Is your daughter tying the laces each time, of running the loose enough to just slip on and off without  tying/untying? I know this is how I have most of my trainers, because I’m lazy and they’re comfy like that. I also get the exact same wear pattern as you describe, but I accept if as a consequence of how I wear them.  

FYI My kids have the same/similar Nikes for school and they too are battered, only 6 month into the school year…

Why dont schools have standards anymore, or does she change in to shoes when she gets there.

They do, certainly more so than when I was at school. Many you have to purchase the clothes from specified shop, we didn’t except the ones with the logo. Even the PE kits have a logo and that’s what they must wear.

Hope my lad doesn’t read this thread, just got him a pair of George’s finest from Asda for £20.

binners

The campaigns feature Air Force 1’s, and other plain black trainers like Adidas Forums (which I ended up buying for Binnerette number 2 last year as we couldn’t get black AF1’s in her size for love nor money). This would suggest that black trainers are the norm in the majority of schools. All the major manufacturers are clearly making a range of plain black trainers specifically for this market

They’re certainly not the norm here. I just checked my 3 local secondary schools websites and none accept this type of shoe. AF1 are specifically shown as being not allowed on one of their websites. We are classified as a deprived area though, so they probably don’t want some kids being bullied cos they can’t afford them.

Got some adidas walking shoes replaced as the soles disappeared in only 3 months. This was with Sports Shoes who were fantastic about it all.

Air Force 1s and the like are also banned here. It has to be black and a proper shoe that is capable of being polished and no logos. Ie normal school shoes like our days at school. No bad thing though and keeps uniform neutral and not a fashion/ affordability thing.

If you step away from tradition and think about bringing up children in 2024 and what they’ll go on to for a minute…..

How many adults work in a place where a blazer and tie is a thing? Precious few – so why do we make our kids do it? And how many of us could look down right now and find a version of school shoes on our feet? Maybe a few more than the first question but still a lot less than half of us I suspect. Making our kids do what we don’t makes us look like a bunch of dafties.

I used to teach in a school that didn’t have uniform. Initially I thought it great (mainly because I didn’t have to spend half my life telling kid off!) but I’ve rowed back on that now. They just made up their own uniform that was more expensive and more far more judgemental.

If I was able to set the standard now, it’d be a uniform not a free for all. But it would have tough durable (and repairable) heavyweight canvas trousers – somewhere between jeans and combats, probably a logoed polo – intended to be worn untucked, and a jumper or hoody. Then a pair of trainers not unlike the Air Force. They’d look like a cross between a warehouse worker, a member of a emergency response service and Maccy D worker; an uncool but very hard to get too wrong look that would not cost parents a fortune and should last until outgrown. No skirt option; totally non-gendered, just choose the option that suits your body shape. Blazers, leather school shoes, ties and **** FLANNEL TROUSERS that rip just thinking about a kick about could all get to ****.

But it would have tough durable (and repairable) heavyweight canvas trousers – somewhere between jeans and combats, probably a logoed polo – intended to be worn untucked, and a jumper or hoody.

Isn’t that standard prison issue?

Isn’t that standard prison issue?

Yes, exactly that. I was going to use that as my description but thought it might have the wrong connotation!

Trainers are verboten unless in PE

Be interesting to see a definition of a trainer.
An AF1 as above has an all black, mainly plain leather upper with black rubber sole. By many definitions that is a shoe and not a trainer.

Anyway, Nike CS has always been pretty good for me, so well worth a shot on a return.

I always buy my Nike stuff direct from them via their app. I’ve had issues with a couple of items, one pair of trainers that split and a duffle bag where the stitching failed. Depending on how long I’d owned the item (and if it’s still a current product), I’ve been offered either a complete replacement, full refund or partial refund. All done via the chat function on the app and very simple.

In regards the AF1 in question, I doubt it’s a fit for purpose thing; sounds more like they don’t fit properly or aren’t being worn with the laces fastened correctly but I doubt Nike would quibble. I don’t wear AF1’s but my Nephews do and theirs seem to wear just fine (they seem to live in them and are 12 months+ old)

They do, certainly more so than when I was at school. Many you have to purchase the clothes from specified shop, we didn’t except the ones with the logo. Even the PE kits have a logo and that’s what they must wear.

The (remarkably shit) school i went to had that, shirt, tie, trousers and all the PE kit came from two preferred suppliers that (according to the school) offered the best value for money and quality of kit.

Maybe they had in the 1930s. But not when i was there. Most of the local supermarket own brands were better quality, less than half the price and made out of fabric which contained actual cotton.
Even M&S was cheaper.

Anyway, i got a fairly regular detentions for not wearing correct school uniform.

They still have the same two suppliers, despite the entire school having been shut down, the site levelled and rebuilt with all new staff.

My daughters wear them for walking to and from school. Maybe 3 miles.  Not the cheapest but we’ve found they last for ages. I think a word should be had. They are banned in school so they leave their school shoes in their lockers and change when the come and go.

I used to think proper shoes are what’s needed, however comparing these trainers to ‘proper’ shoes, and also looking at the (flawed?) barefoot movement, there’s nothing in it IMO.

Anyway, they’ve offered a full refund as they’re less than 2 years. With that level of service we may be a customer for life – maybe that’s their plan (depsite the dubious resource considerations).

Ive found nike to be very good at customer service.

My kids (age 15 and 14) have had a variety “all black” trainers as school shoes.  They tend to outgrow them before they wear out… Generally they just ask for the black version of their preferred “not school” trainers.  It does mean that are happy to wear them outside school as well.

Seems odd to ban Airforce 1s specifically, some of my kids school mates rock up in £200 worth of Nikes.

Examples: https://www.nike.com/gb/w/mens-black-lifestyle-shoes-13jrmz90poyznik1zy7ok

Are we sure that the airforce ban isn’t more to do with “roadmen”/gangs?

Eldest is enjoying Nike AirMax SC and youngest who is more \m/ is currently on some Vans Half Cabs.

Kickers for my lad …. the old school style ones to begin with, loads of his mate had the same, and now more of a trainer style but still kickers. They have lasted his abuse well (never undoes his laces, I really cannot moan, its a learnt behavior) …. Now if he’d just stop growing for a second they might last even longer.

For those questioning school uniforms in general …. If the some of the above issues are over just the shoes, imagen what it would be like if the kids didn’t wear uniforms !!

At my daughters school the af1s are the example picture of what is not allowed. Surprised any allow them with that wacking great tick on the side.

Why dont schools have standards anymore, or does she change in to shoes when she gets there.

Many schools are just pleased when children turn up without inventing artificial barriers.  Covid sent a message to a large part of that generation that (a) attending school was optional (b) they weren’t a huge priority (c) the sanctions for not complying were probably pretty minor compared to being locked in hour house for months (d) during the time they were in school the windows were open for improved venitlation and uniform was ignored as it was freezing.   Add in some genuine cases where isolation has caused anxiety for returning to school, and some cases where parents attitudes to schools has become worse than before and suddenly you are presented with a problem.  If a uniform policy is perceived to be part of that problem its going to be deprioritised.  Now add in a “cost of living crisis” which whilst affecting some very badly, will also be quoted by those who can only afford 2 foreign holidays a year! And you have an issue when a kid arrives at school wearing trainers and parents say the thought it was OK and don’t have the money to buy new shoes.  Once one does it, the problem spreads.  Once your kid is the “minority” not wearing something “trendy” on their feet, you feel pressure to not make them exposed to inevitable social stigma and the problem self perpetuates.  Once the school loses grip on this it becomes VERY hard to reintroduce it.

My daughter’s school recently sent out a reminder about uniform policy (which only requires footwear to be predominantly black), because a “spot check” has identified that across the school 20% of pupils were not even wearing a shirt and tie.  The backed up their reminder by pointing out that a parent survey at the end of last year had seen the “vast majority of parents supporting the policy”.  The vast majority was 75%.  In reality the sanctions available to the school are pretty nonsensical.

At my daughters school the af1s are the example picture of what is not allowed. Surprised any allow them with that wacking great tick on the side.

Its not 1950. Should they wear a cap and carry a satchel too containing their ration card and a copy of the Beano?

I was going to say “isn’t it time that we binned this idiocy?” but Binners beat me to the punch.

I understand the benefits, not least of which being a leveller so that the poor kids don’t get picked on by the rich kids. But really this smacks of (let’s say it together) “we’ve always done it this way.” It’s archaic, who cares what shoes kids wear. Who cares what shoes anyone wears outside of a construction site? (And, er, in Woodwork.)

High school kids are going to want minor acts of rebellion. It’s exciting. When I was at school we were always pushing boundaries, neon socks were a thing in the 80s and you could mostly wear them in secret assuming your pants were long enough. Shirt not tucked in, ties tied backwards with the thin end at the front and the proper bit inside your shirt… I think if it were my kids I’d rather that was their first pushback against authority rather than doing a couple of lines in the bogs at breaktime.

I think I’ve just argued against my own argument…

Well said Cougs, especially this bit:

High school kids are going to want minor acts of rebellion

A ‘uniform inside the uniform’, short tie, shirt-tail blowing in the wind etc that sort of thing.

so that the poor kids don’t get picked on by the rich kids.

But we all knew who the poor kids were didn’t we? A school uniform didn’t hide that.
Our London comp in the early seventies didn’t give two hoots about school uniforms (or teaching come to that!).

I do wonder about the point of uniforms in 2024

I used to work in a school. The headteacher made a point that can’t be argued against:

The ‘home’ situations of a lot of pupils is on an incredibly broad spectrum, from people living in gated 8 bedroom houses in north london suburbs, to kids living in HMO’s with other families with barely any money. The uniform ‘levels the playing field’ for the kids and creates genuine equality in the school environment (which is an incredibly important and formative environment in someone’s life).

It made a lot of sense when it was explained to me that way. Especially when you view it from a child’s quite one dimensional lens of life. Others have also pointed this out above.

Generally it’s positive. 4 months isn’t great. Nike don’t make premium products though, they make trendy products.

The headteacher made a point that can’t be argued against:

Yes it can, I’ve already disagreed with that and will do so again. That was exactly the argument our headmaster used in 1971 and, bear in mind this was a really shit School with kids from working class families in West London, we still knew who the poor kids were. A nice new uniform looks a lot different from a third hand-me-down one.

Good outcome.

Nike don’t make premium products though, they make trendy products.

Its a pair of plain black trainers, not some leopard-print stiletto’s. As myself and others have pointed out from experience, a pair of Air Force Ones will last a full school year of walking an hour back and too to school every day, as well as all the general abuse they get while they’re there. My daughters would happily wear them at the evening and weekends too.

The OP’s experience wasn’t as good as this and they’ve offered him a full refund, without quibbling, as part of their two year guarantee. Seems pretty good to me

There was a thread on here the other day about things being worth what you pay for them. I’d say that given that, 100 quid for the Nikes represents pretty good value for money

Edit: just had a quick google and you can get them for 70 quid, though I doubt you would in September

a point that can’t be argued against:

You’ve been here for ten years, surely you know better than that by now.

Nike don’t make premium products though, they make trendy products.

Which do we suppose kids care more about?

Not sure the logic of “no trainers in school because poor people can’t afford them” stands up to much scrutiny. Kids are unlikely to wear a pair of Clarks/Brantano’s finest outside of school but they will wear a pair of predominantly black trainers.

It’s not a tick, it’s a swoosh

Haven’t Nike always lasted only a few months at best and Sketchers less so.

Fashion over function me thunks!

Ironically enough I have bought a set of £30 Bikes of late to find they comfy and half smart casual haha

 

Uniform is just another way of schools showing “common sense” that will appeal to people who won’t know any better, it’s also a great way to generate revenue when items have to be bought from a preferred supplier.

As for levelling up and hiding the poor kids, as mentioned above that’s nonsense and you can tell the poor kids because the shit blazer you make them wear has fallen apart and they can’t afford a new one.

Somehow Finland, Sweden and Demark manage to thrash the UK by most education metrics despite allowing civvies, trainers and pink hair…