School uniforms should be mostly generic with a few distinctive feature, the Office for Competition has concluded in its final report on the supply of school uniforms.

The report, published today, found that the market has been influenced by the constant behavioural pattern of schools, parents and suppliers

The office drew up the report following a fact-finding exercise on the market, on which it had issued a preliminary report. National consultation followed.

In its report, the office said that while schools insisted on the importance of specific uniforms as a means for conferring distinct identity and considered exclusive arrangements as guaranteeing supply, parents tended to be passive consumers purchasing generally from the supplier indicated by the school.

Established suppliers generally supported the idea of having exclusive arrangements with schools, as this guaranteed a certain amount of business. They argued that by virtue of these arrangements, supply was guaranteed and economies of scale were derived.

The office considered that for the market to become more competitive, there had to be a change in the way schools, parents and suppliers acted.

Schools had to understand that the distinct identity of the school could still be conferred even by means of less complex uniforms. When setting their uniform policy, schools had to be aware of the major role they played and be careful not to hinder this process on the market.

The office recommended that ideally a uniform should be made up mostly of generic items with a few distinctive features, like the tie and badge, that would make that particular uniform unique.

This would allow different suppliers to stock different uniforms, resulting in increased competition on the market, bringing about better prices, better quality and wider choice. It would enable parents to become active consumers benefitting from the possibility of being able to shop around. It would also address the schools' concerns with respect to security of supply and distinct identity.

The office noted that many schools already had complicated uniforms in place and may have valid reasons for not wanting to change them. It said that while it encouraged schools to change their uniforms for a more generic one, it could not oblige them to do so.

Where schools decided to retain their complex uniforms, more attention had to be paid to the process of competition.

All willing suppliers and retailers, it said, could be given the possibility to supply and sell the uniform in question. Schools should be ready to make available on request to suppliers and retailers all necessary information, particularly concerning colour codes, material quality and the patterns/designs of uniform items.

The parents would have the benefit of purchasing the uniform from the retailer of their choice and the schools would not need to enter into the merits of the prices being charged. The market itself would determine the price.

The schools could regularly issue a call for interested suppliers and retailers to come forward to supply their uniform and all those satisfying the criteria set by the school would be selected and recommended to the parents.

A tendering/expression of interest process could also be adopted, enhancing price competition and quality standards.

Any agreement entered into following a bidding process had to be limited in time.

The full report can be read in the pdf link below.