Reply to Do you think parents who volunteer and donate more to schools deserve better treatment for their child?

Forum Index » Elementary School-Aged Kids

Reply to "Do you think parents who volunteer and donate more to schools deserve better treatment for their child?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]As a blanket statement, no.  Some students have parents who are working 2 jobs, or are in foster care, and they should absolutely not be penalized for not having basically a SAHP who can volunteer 10 hours a week or a rich parent who can fund the entire PTA.

If we are allowed nuance- I do think that if a parent is an unusually helpful volunteer, or takes on volunteer tasks that one one wants (everyone wants to chaperone the cute half day field trip with their child, no one wants to volunteer to mop the cafeteria floors and take all the trash to the dump after the school carnival ends at 9pm), it should not be frowned upon if that kid's family maybe gets picked to run the most fun carnival booth, or maybe [b]if a parent volunteers to be the backstage mom at a drama club performance- therefore not getting to watch her child perform, since she's backstage, this is a classic job that no one signs up for ever in our school's drama club- then that student's family (the other parent, etc) gets front row seats to the performance and a free copy of the DVD recording[/b] to show to the backstage mom afterwords.[/quote]

So if you miss your kids performing because you have time to volunteer, you should get preferential treatment but if you have to earn money and miss it, tough.

That is pretty gross classism [/quote]

It's because she VOLUNTEERED to miss her kid's performance in order to help the show go on.  I am completely fine with that.  Like how airlines offer you a few hundred bucks to give up your seat and take a different flight later in the day if they're overbooked.  [/quote]

Because people like that volunteer, your kid gets to be in the play, musical, performance, whatever. There is zero acknowledgment or gratitude from people like you. Your kid gets the experience and you don't have to do a thing and then you want to begrudge a small perk or token of gratitude from others? Sounds pretty selfish.

She VOLUNTEERED because she has the resources to do so. No job/flexible job. I don’t think we should give people with more resources more perks, as they have plenty already. [/quote][/quote]

Dude - she has MORE RESOURCES because she worked hard all her life to create these resources for herself and her family.

A well-to-do mom in DMV with flex job/no job who is able to prioritize her kids was probably that good student in HS who was busting her ass studying Calc in HS instead of giving BJs to the loser behind the bleachers. Her high SES, her marriage, her 2 kids, her cleaning lady, her education, her net worth, her involvement with PTA, school theatre, kids EC activities...she has earned it all.

You have to pay the piper. [/quote]

Ok? That doesn’t mean she had earned extra perks for volunteering or that she deserves front row seats for her family and a free DVD. If you’re being compensated its not volunteering.

[/quote]

And, now PP, you’re grasping for straws.

In theory, it would be nice if everyone in school paid a fee in the to cover all student expenses volunteer efforts and donations provide for …. And some schools do that.  Or hell, make it a co-op and have a volunteer hours requirement for every family. Then, anything above and beyond is icing.  Idk if that would ever work in public schools but I wouldn’t mind it in our extracurriculars where there is heavy parent influence on decision-makers and many kids go unseen for years.  [/quote]

If you think volunteers deserve perks and better treatment than people without extra time, thats up to you. Own it. Say you think rich people deserve more than poor people. [/quote]

The statement above doesn’t make sense in reply to the PP.  Noting that different families contribute in different ways is not an endorsement of perks for volunteers. It’s a basic observation about how parent involvement plays out across schools and activities.

What I actually said was that some communities use standardized fees or required volunteer hours to distribute the workload evenly. That’s a structural model, not a “rich people deserve more” philosophy. If you’re going to assign motives, at least anchor them in what was written rather than in a narrative you’ve created. And, I suggested taking a co-op model.  What do you suggest as the solution to your issues with volunteerism?[/quote]

Your proposal boils down to assessing a fee in either money or time for a free public service. If you are in a private school setting, then that may be appropriate. In a public school context the people with the least money are often. Also the people with the least time— they call it “the leisured classes” for a reason.

It is better for a school, not to have a play then to have a play staffed by parents who are expecting kickbacks.[/quote]

You’re reducing what I wrote to something it wasn’t. Describing models that some communities use to distribute workload isn’t the same as proposing a fee for public education. It’s an example of how other systems handle the tension you’re pointing to.

And yes, in public schools, time and money are uneven. That’s exactly why relying on a handful of parents to carry entire programs creates the dynamic you’re objecting to. Pretending the solution is “no program at all” doesn’t fix inequity — it just eliminates opportunities for every kid, including the ones with the least access.

If you want to critique what I actually said, fine. But rewriting it into a caricature about “leisured classes” is avoidance.[/quote]

“Standardized fees” or “mandatory volunteer hours” boil down to the same thing: taking the most from people with the least, for what is supposed to be a free public service. No program at all isn’t the only solution— and I didn’t say it was— it is simply a preferable solution than a system where parents expect kickbacks to “volunteer”.  [/quote]

PP is arguing from ideology, not reality.

The “kickbacks” line is the tell. That isn’t equity language - it’s resentment. “Kickbacks” is projection: volunteers = insiders; insiders = corrupt; corrupt = getting perks.

So any mention of workload distribution gets filtered through that narrative. PP is defending a worldview, not engaging a point.

And PP’s worldview is simple: volunteer labor is exploitative and volunteers are self‑interested elitists. It’s convenient. It makes non‑involvement morally superior, removes responsibility for outcomes, and delegitimizes anyone else’s effort.  [/quote]

Its also…backed up very well on a thread where people say overtly that they take perks for their families when they volunteer, or outright that they are the top of a hierarchical society because they have more money than others.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics