slythwolf:
“ kyraneko:
“ whitmerule:
“ stele3:
“ gameboygirl:
“ allinternationalnews:
“Colorado Lunch Lady Fired for Giving Kids Free Meals Says She’d Do It Again http://ift.tt/1JoLWZu
”
from the article:
“ …“I would have kids start crying when I...

slythwolf:

kyraneko:

whitmerule:

stele3:

gameboygirl:

allinternationalnews:

Colorado Lunch Lady Fired for Giving Kids Free Meals Says She’d Do It Again http://ift.tt/1JoLWZu

from the article:

…“I would have kids start crying when I told them they didn’t have money in their account because they were terrified of getting the cheese sandwich.”

The district’s policy is to give a student a hot meal and charge the parent’s account the first three times they forget lunch money, communications director Tustin Amole told ABC News today. The fourth time, the student is given a cheese sandwich – a single slice of cheese on a hamburger bun – and a milk.

…Curry felt she could not stand by and keep letting it happen.

It’s not nutrition. It’s not healthy,” she said. “It’s wrong on so many levels, and I hated to see food go to waste. I hated to see food thrown away that could’ve been given to these children that are hungry.”

Curry was supposed to take the students’ food, throw it away and replace it with the cheese sandwich and milk if a student had exceeded the $7.60 debt limit, she said. Instead, she would cancel the transaction and remind the student to bring their lunch money.

Curry acknowledged that her actions went against the district’s policy and when asked why she did it, Curry said, “Because it was the right thing to do and sometimes doing what is right is not what is easy.”

once again, under capitalism, noncompliance with immoral rules means the employee loses her livelihood. and less children have food.

Christ. They would rather throw the food away than feed a child.

Because humiliation is important!

They actually designed the policy to throw food away rather than feed a child.

They deliberately have the child pay after they’ve received the lunch and before they eat it, so that the child gets food that cannot be returned to the serving supply. 

They have no interest in retaining the food.

They have no interest in not wasting the food.

They have no interest in not losing the monetary value of the food.

It’s just as fucking gone in the dumpster as it would be if the kid ate it.

But they’d rather put the food in the dumpster than let the child eat it.

They crafted this policy and practice to tell a child that they are less deserving of food than a dumpster that does not need to eat.

to punish these children, let us remember, for something they cannot control, because children are not in charge of how much money their parents have or how much money their parents give the school

  1. young-dumb-mess reblogged this from liquifiedwater
  2. no-more-blood-to-bleed reblogged this from liquifiedwater
  3. liquifiedwater reblogged this from c-bassmeow
  4. solemn-poet-23 reblogged this from lgbtmiddleeast
  5. kantochampred reblogged this from mayflower-gal
  6. mayflower-gal reblogged this from terrific-togekiss
  7. itstoohotinthiscountry reblogged this from terrific-togekiss
  8. terrific-togekiss reblogged this from apenitentialprayer
  9. katiekupkake reblogged this from spockistheword
  10. mcpeace323 reblogged this from drucifer-the-treasoner
  11. drucifer-the-treasoner reblogged this from redribbonhood
  12. redribbonhood reblogged this from odinsblog
  13. bossapop reblogged this from odinsblog
  14. mahtpass reblogged this from zurizaldun
  15. abookisproofofmagic reblogged this from immcfuckinglosingmyshit
  16. penguin-hunter19 reblogged this from oliverthegayboi
  17. thisistheendfriend reblogged this from booksandtardigrades
  18. catastrophic-scribbles reblogged this from lemonclock