You seem to be the only FReeper who doesn’t know the definition of bullying, and can’t find a dictionary. I’m not buying your act. You invested a lot of time on this thread, advocating the humiliation of an innocent child for events beyond his control. Even if you really are as ignorant about the meanings of words as you claim to be, that doesn’t excuse holding an innocent child up to ridicule to punish him for something you know he’s not guilty of. No matter what you call it, it’s wrong.
So, I suppose you talked to God to determine that the child had no influence on being late that day. He didn't leave his lunch on the counter. He didn't forget to put his homework in his backpack. He didn't spill milk down the front of his shirt and have to change it. I guess your are smarter than everybody else and know things that they don't.
As to the bullying reference, since you are unable to define what you believe the term means so I cannot discuss it based on that, I will address it from another angle. In civilized society, those placed in positions of authority by that society establish rules for the society. They also clearly define consequences for violation of those rules. They enforce those consequences when rules are violated. That appears to be exactly what the school did. It is in fact one of their assigned task.
If that is too logical for you to comprehend, let's move on to the psychological aspect. The three lowest rungs of Maslow's ladder of psychological needs are Survival, Security and Belonging. Psychologist hold that to impose change in the behaviour of an individual you must impact them on one of these rungs. I'm sure we can both agree that making the child fear for its survival or security would be a bit much. That leaves the third rung, belonging. That is exactly where the imposed discipline targeted.
So, the school was carrying out its assigned responsibility with a discipline that targets the correct motivational level for the child to impose a change that is beneficial to the child in the long run. (Unless of course you believe that a pattern of tardiness is a desirable trait that a child should be learning.)
Now you are going to try to counter with the argument that the punishment is humiliating and damaging to the ego of the child. Nice try, but it doesn't wash. Children are very capable of grasping the message that if you break a rule, you suffer the consequences and it is a message best learned. The ego damage you would allude to occurs when the child is exposed to competing messages indicating that they should not be held responsible and should not be subject to consequences. The exact message that you are up on your soap box shouting out to counter the message that the school is trying to send. This is also well documented in the psychological field. The effects of this type of influence is clearly visible in today's society. Blacks should not be held responsible for their actions and well being. Illegal immigrants should not be held to establish laws. Schools should not be allowed to impose discipline.
Do you not pay any attention to the fact that the growing subsets of our society, to which the young and the impressionable are drawn, are in fact the ones that are the strictest about rules and enforcing them, gangs, cartels, militias, jihadists, and within the schools the cliques? Why is that, why are the precious young darlings that you are so concerned about ego damage drawn to the subgroups that thrive on the very practices (often at an extreme level) that you are fighting so hard to protect them from?
I could continue on with example after example how your distorted thinking is leading to continuous breakdown of our society and its valuable structures, but it would be pointless. After all, you aren't even able to define what the term bullying means to you. Why should I believe you can grasp anything that deals above the most basic emotional level where you choose to wallow?