Australia

...just mayyyyyybe it's beecause they sell the uniform supply contract and make a lot of money for their budget from it? Dunno.

The flip side of the coin is, if parents buy cheaper uniforms they don’t have to buy more expensive, name brand clothes for their children. The school also avoids situations where kids with wealthy parents bully kids from poorer families.

There is probably also an argument for it helping to build school or team spirit, unity etc etc

Nothing is as draconian as school uniforms. School uniforms don't solve the inequality problem at all as there are always other personal belongings where it can be demonstrated. That being said, any institution that decides what clothes someone else should or should not wear is deeply authoritarian. Of course, there may be certain scenarios where such authoritarianism is necessary. Schools however do not fit such scenarios.

Conformity, the theory is that kids will behave better when they all look like each other and can't single each other out. Which is completely wrong, as we'll always find ways to separate ourselves from each other.

Schools are full of bad administrators who are poor at managing those they're responsible for, and a hallmark of bad management is blanket policies, dress codes are an example of this, and dress codes begin a slippery slope of what a student can or can't do, including hairstyles, extracurricular activities, what they read, and more.

School uniform for me back in the day was a white shirt, grey pants, and leather shoes. The only "school" part of the uniform was a tie and blazer with the school crest on it. And I even went through all of high school never purchasing said blazer.

This was in NZ nearly 15 years ago.

My point being, uniforms shouldn't be breaking the bank. If schools would simplify the uniform as to not be that unique to the school, they might be able to drive down cost as more readily available clothing could be used to make up the uniform.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Meredith Hagger, principal solicitor with Youth Law Australia, says in Queensland the education department's policy dictates that schools must have strategies in place to help families afford uniforms.

"That can include cost reduction, financial support, payment plans, or more time to buy school uniforms," she says.

"If you've got a uniform that restricts your movement and you're a primary schooler, then you can't turn cartwheels and do all those normal things that kids do to let off steam at break [time].

Private schools can be about as strict as they like when it comes to uniforms and dress codes, provided they don't breach laws that prohibit discrimination against people because of their gender, race, culture, or sexuality.

Ms Hagger says such policies and dress codes must meet strict guidelines set by the state's education department and there are limits to how they are enforced.

"And as a student, you can't be given a consequence that damages your academic or career prospects for breaching the dress code."

The original article contains 821 words, the summary contains 166 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

I always thought it was funny that bringing in blazers was the sign of a failing state school, in the UK at least.
Ofsted good/excellent? Polos and fleeces are fine, it's all good.
Requires Improvement/Inadequate? Shit, better get all the scrotes in cheap blazers that cost £50 so we can ape the private school down the road.

Because public schools have to compete with private schools, the uniforms make them look comparable and has more of an effect on the parents perception of value of the school.

Each public school gets funding dependant on enrolment, the end result is absurd pricing for single income parents. When I was in High School we could get a $7 shirt from Big W and look identical to other students minus the logo.

There are exactly two reasons why schools mandate uniforms: greed and/or authoritarian leanings.