You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I've always been against them, both as a parent and as someone married to a teacher but at least there's a clear legal position now.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39504338 ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39504338[/url]
Mr Platt's argument that despite missing a week of school for a holiday, his daughter had regularly attended school over the course of the year, with an attendance rate of over 92%.
So he thinks that apparently missing one day of school in approx every two weeks is OK then?
Theoretically turning up for just the first day of each term is also 'regular'.
Wonder what's that's cost him in solicitors then?
He should just set up one of those free school thingies and stick holidays abroad on the curriculum. Probably get paid for it as well.
He's fighting against the wrong people - he should argue that the holiday companys are ripping us off on non term bookings.
But the argument is/will be that the non term holidays aren't more expensive - its the term bookings that are cheaper to encouorage busines in period of anticipated low volume.
once again, badly written law is the source of a lot of unnecessary cost and argument.
At issue was the meaning of the words “fails to attend regularly” in section 444(1) of the Education Act 1996. The court ruled that “regularly” did not mean “evenly spaced” or “sufficiently often” but instead “in accordance with the attendance rules”.
That's quite a jump in translation by Lady Hale to contrive to get the law to work as it was probably intended.
Never use adverbs in legal documents would appear to be the lesson in all this.
"Never use adverbs" is generally good advice.
[s]generally[/s] good advice 😉
He's fighting against the wrong people - he should argue that the holiday companys are ripping us off on non term bookings.But the argument is/will be that the non term holidays aren't more expensive - its the term bookings that are cheaper to encouorage busines in period of anticipated low volume.
This. As the partner of a teacher I have seen the disruption caused when children are removed during term time for holidays. On return there is always catch up to do with the absent pupils and no additional resource to do this.
Having read some of the Lady Hale's judgement (always a good idea before one comments BTW, ahem) to be fair the word "regularly" first appears in the 1944 Education Act.
Third, the duty of LEAs to make byelaws was replaced by a statutory offence: if a child of compulsory school age who is a registered pupil at a school “fails to attend regularly thereat”, the parent was guilty of an offence
(section 39(1)).
She does then go through 17 paragraphs clarifying how she got to "in accordance with the rules" being the right definition to use.
Oh yeah... The kids have to catch up on some great skill they missed out on while away, one that would have really helped them get a job on graduating :/
I was taken on loads of term time hols, didn't effect me in any way. Found out what I missed, worked on it before I got back over the weekend (really hard to read a book / watch a YouTube vid right?), got bk and found that the library book often taught me better than the teacher...
Well done you. Have a peanut.
It didn't affect you, hoorah. However it can affect teachers who need to help children not as awesome as you catch up. This can have a knock on effect as the teacher is then focused on one individual rather than the group. Multiply this by the number of children absent during term time.
I think you'll find that a large proportion of kids wouldn't agree with you and are as diligent as you were.really hard to read a book / watch a YouTube vid right?
People fight like dogs to get their kids into the school of their choice, then think they can take them out whenever they feel like it for a cheap holiday. Fine, just assume they have given up their place and give it to someone who will turn up.
[I]I was taken on loads of term time hols, didn't [b]effect[/b] me in any way.[/I]
Obviously.
He's fighting against the wrong people - he should argue that the holiday companys are ripping us off on non term bookings.
You're not being ripped off. No holiday company could have enough capacity to cope with all the demand in school holidays and not go bust because their planes / hotels are 90% empty the rest of the year. So, they all (sensibly) ration supply by raising prices at times when demand exceeds supply.
It's basic economics.
He's fighting against the wrong people - he should argue that the holiday companys are ripping us off on non term bookings.
Free market, innit
If it was compulsory to have children, or go to Disneyland, this argument might be valid
Kryton57 - Member
He's fighting against the wrong people - he should argue that the holiday companys are ripping us off on non term bookings.
Ah well, they argue that the price during holidays is the normal price and term time are discounted due to less demand.
Sure, "supply & demand", but they can run the flights/hotels/etc at the so called discounted rate just fine and many still manage to fill up (term time flights I've been on to popular destinations are still full). It's S&D in that it's an opportunity for maximising profit (to be fair, they're a business and usually that's a key point of being in business).
They could though just increase the supply during peak periods to meet the demand and thus prices should remain the same 😉
See here's the thing (from the article):
In her judgement, Lady Hale said if parents were able to withdraw children whenever they wanted it would cause unacceptable disruption.
But a £60 fine isn't going to dissuade someone from pulling their kids out of school if it saves them several thousand pounds on the price of the holiday.
So this only really impacts people to whom £60 is a lot of money and is greater than the money they would save on their holiday.
So he thinks that apparently missing one day of school in approx every two weeks is OK then?
I had the same thought - 92% attendance isn't very good when you think about it.
While I don't think the very occasional missed day does any irreparable damage, the schools are in a difficult position when being asked to judge which absences are acceptable, and it's not fair on the teachers who are being asked to make up the missed work.
he should argue that the holiday companys are ripping us off
Supply vs. demand. And if your holiday is that much cheaper you can pay the £60?
Instead of dragging around the courts in a righteous manner.
The problem here is the responsibility that the government places on the schools to achieve results. Put the onus for results completely onto the parents and then absolve the schools. The child's results are then down to the parents' will. It'll never happen but this is at the root imo. Or privatise all schools and see whether parents don't care about a few days off when they're paying for it.
"ripping us off on non term bookings"
There speaks the voice of the unthinking.
Not a rip off because you do have a choice. Just don't go. Also how about thinking that these are the normal prices and those outside holiday time are discounted . A bit like last years bikes discounted.
92% attendance is awful unless illness is part of it. Sadly those parents who do take their kids somewhere educational are overwhelmed by those who clear off to Disneyland or what ever.
It isn't so important if the kid is a thick (technical term) looser and its a few days at the age of 7 in February. I can think of several who wouldn't lose out if they quit school at 12! There has to be a universal rule. You can't have grey areas in law.
But this was unauthorised absence, wasn't it? The issue IMO is about the ability of the Head to authorise absence in the first place.
that ability was withdrawn from the head.
There's almost no "authorised" absence.
The
amendments made clear that head teachers may not grant any leave of absence
during term time unless ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist.
Yes and that's the issue imo.
They could though just increase the supply during peak periods to meet the demand and thus prices should remain the same
Yeah, cos Thompsons have a couple of spare Airbus or Boeings tucked up in lockup garage they can dust down and use. Alicante airport can also quickly knock up another runway and build a few more hotels. 🙄
...kid is a thick (technical term) [b]looser[/b]...
Oh the irony. 😆
As a parent but not married to a teacher I've spoken to both my kids' teahcers about this. They are quite clear that it doesn't cause any disruption as there will be little missed that can't be cuaght up outside of school. I have my hoidays allocated as does my wife so to get a full family togther we need to take them out of school. It's been almost 5 years since we last had a proper holday together partially thanks to this silly law.
And Stoner and Molgtips are right, a sensible school allows it.
Incidently both ours do for my kids if I wanted to.
92% attendance is awful unless illness is part of it.
+1.
I'm pretty sure attendance below 95% gets you a call from the attendance officer to find out why.
I have an interest in this as I also have kids and am married to a teacher.
I do think the price hike on holidays/flights during school holidays is a bit wrong, but agree we have a choice not to go.
I'd have no qualms about taking my kids out of school if I felt the life experience gained outweighed what they were missing at school.
My kids education has been regularly disrupted by the teachers missing lessons for training/working at other schools/etc.
My wife does a dual role at school (Science teacher + SENCo) she regularly drops science lessons (whicgh are then covered by a 'cover supervisor')if a meeting/SENCo stuff has to take priority - how is this any less disruptive than taking kids out of school??
Sadly those parents who do take their kids somewhere educational...
There's nothing a school likes better than a self righteous parent saying their child should be let off for a week because they are going somewhere worthy.
"My holiday has more value than yours..."
92% attendance is awful unless illness is part of it.
in this case, the mother had previously taken the daughter out of school without authorisation and had paid the fine.
If that was a week for holiday, then that would have put a dent in attendance.
190 days a year, 8% is 15 days away. That's a lot.
All ridiculously arbitrary really.
And Stoner and Molgtips are right, a sensible school allows it.
We did it this year (again) for our family ski trip.
Mrs produced a letter from work explaining that "NHS winter pressures" meant she couldn't take time off at the normal February half term.
School were fine with it and gave us a letter back approving the absence.
Unfortunately I think that discretion is being removed.
I love these debates!
You choose to have children, therefore you know they will go to school and thus limit school holidays come along and you'll have to pay more. What happened to the days of only going on holiday where you can afford to go? And sadly if it's out of your budget you have to go elsewhere?
The same with work, everyone in society seems to think they are owed things now days. You have kids either become a teacher or live with it, it's the way the world had revolved for a long time in relation to schooling.
For me it isn't about the cost. Sometimes I'm just not off the same time as my wife. My parents had the same problem so took us out of school. What ever happened to allowing parents to do that?
You have kids either become a teacher...
Will that make holidays cheaper?
What happened to the days of only going on holiday where you can afford to go?
Maybe I can [i]afford[/i] to spend several thousands pounds extra on a holiday that is identical to the one a third of that price the week before/after - except much busier.
But that doesn't mean I'm going to!
it's the way the world had revolved for a long time in relation to schooling.
It's not though - the fines are a relatively new thing. IME it was fairly common to take kids out of school when I was a lad.
Or how about those of us who work in jobs where they might not get away over the summer? Or any holidays? I suppose they should just never do anything because it was their choice? Sorry, are they not owed quality time with their families?
FWIW I'm not keen on pulling children out of school to go on a jolly at the drop of a hat but it seems people forget that there are folk out there living at the shitty end of the stick.
I'm out with the dog. Just passed 2 kids helping their Dad with lambing. Great sight and they will probably learn more than a week at school.
breatheeasy - Member
Yeah, cos Thompsons have a couple of spare Airbus or Boeings tucked up in lockup garage they can dust down and use. Alicante airport can also quickly knock up another runway and build a few more hotels.
That's what the extra cost when demand is high should be for. Re-investment to increase capacity and meet the demand. Maybe they'd go to waste off peak but on the other hand flight sharing is a thing as many airlines do.
But easier to not bother, and then can hand the extra cash to shareholders instead.
Plus increasing supply would encourage more to book in holidays and less in term time, so then you would have empty planes off peak (as I've said though, popular destinations are rarely empty even off peak, so what is the "discount" trying to encourage?).
Air industry expert, are we deadkenny? 😆
Whilst, I'm sure there are situations where some parent's employers make it difficult to coordinte family holidays outside term time, those employers should be put under pressure to be more accomodating.
You choose to have children, therefore you know they will go to school and thus limit school holidays come along and you'll have to pay more. What happened to the days of only going on holiday where you can afford to go? And sadly if it's out of your budget you have to go elsewhere?
I'm a parent and agree completely with this. Being a parent was a choice, my job was a choice, my lifestyle is a choice. All of these things require compromises. It's what being an adult with responsibilities is all about.
Just passed 2 kids helping their Dad with lambing. Great sight and they will probably learn more than a week at school.
It is the Easter holidays so not really that outrageous.
I'm out with the dog. Just passed 2 kids helping their Dad with lambing. Great sight and they will probably learn more than a week at school.
You do realise it's the school holidays currently?
From my POV as a teacher:
A day off sick here or there has minimal impact - though it does still mean planning in catch up time can be a bit of a nightmare.
2 or 3 weeks off in a lump has a massive influence on their learning. They'll potentially miss whole topics, and how can you plan on time for them to catch up as the rest of the class have moved on.
I've tried the extra homework/self-guided learning route, and they don't do it and you often get moany parents complaining about the extra workload. I even sent one little **** off with work to do on holiday (GCSE stuff so quite important) did he do it? Did he ****!
As to the original story - 92% attendance equates to 3.5 weeks missed. So not a little amount.
He should just have sucked it up and paid the fine. There's no way he can argue that a week at Disneyland has educational value!
Bollocks. Were are going away May half term. We are going on the Wednesday before my son breaks up on Friday. If we went on the Saturday it was an extra £1000. He will have just finished his SATS, and having spent the majority of March and April having tests rammed down his throat a few days off school isn't going to affect him one little bit, nor disrupt the rest of the class for that matter.
Ah see it isn't the Easter holidays here and so the kids may well be out of school!
As Peyote says you have to work at it and make it work. For years me and the other half worked in a job where we got 20 days off a year together and that was it! Yes it was our choice and when it became too much I left and got a new job. People expect too much in life and think everything should be given to them on a plate, we all make choices. If the job doesn't work with your family life then find another one, if you can't find one that pays as much then maybe you need to re-think about moving and the size of your mortgage etc. None of us are owed anything on a plate.
Why should businesses be more accommodation just because you have children? My previous employer gave to people with kids too much and those of us without got penalized all the time. As I've already said it's choices you make.
Good for you Peyote. Not giving your kids the holidays that you would like to because you feel duty bound to a system designed to extract the maximum amount of cash out of you is clearly the responsible grown-up thing to do.
People expect too much in life
"I was miserable so you should be too. Accept your lot in life and don't try to buck the system."
hilst, I'm sure there are situations where some parent's employers make it difficult to coordinte family holidays outside term time, those employers should be put under pressure to be more accomodating.
As a manager I try to be but as a manager I've a service to supply so it's not always feasible, more pressure can't change that. A change in the rules about schools can.
Bollocks. Were are going away May half term. We are going on the Wednesday before my son breaks up on Friday. If we went on the Saturday it was an extra £1000. He will have just finished his SATS, and having spent the majority of March and April having tests rammed down his throat a few days off school isn't going to affect him one little bit, nor disrupt the rest of the class for that matter.
And I hope you now get fined.
Doubt you'll learn anything from it, as you seem like a bit of a plonker.
.
The dad was on World at 1 - put his case forward very well - the point about 92% attendance is that the school in question expects 90-95% - which he meets.
"rip off term time holidays" - is there a cartel there or a free market?
Are holidaycos showing massive profits?
🙄
Doubt you'll learn anything from it, as you seem like a bit of a plonker.
And you know me how?
We called our daughter in sick on the very last day of school last year to go to America on a family visit. It saved us about £800 on flights.
Sorry, I'm way behind this one.
What's the fine these days for taking your little darling on a week of [s]Disneyland jollies[/s] educational foreign experience - £60? £200? £months-salary?
You choose to have children, therefore you know they will go to school and thus limit school holidays come along and you'll have to pay more. What happened to the days of only going on holiday where you can afford to go? And sadly if it's out of your budget you have to go elsewhere?
I'm a parent and agree completely with this. Being a parent was a choice, my job was a choice, my lifestyle is a choice. All of these things require compromises. It's what being an adult with responsibilities is all about.
Likewise. Kids now not kids so can now stay in those off-peak 5*s for the price of a "chalet" (look underneath - if it's got wheels it's not a chalet) in France. That's alongside fellow oldies, young couples pre or post toddlers, and those for who whatever reason were not dragged into the abyss which is family life. It's great and schoolies better stay in school...
That said, you'll notice how private schools stagger their spring half terms so parents can get those cheaper skiing deals..? Much as I resent this (chip moi? Slap on the VAT...) it might be making slightly more sensible use of limited capacity.
"Back when I was a lad" etc though, we didn't go on foreign holidays and a trip to the seaside was about all people did around school holidays. If they went anywhere at all.
These days kids expect exotic holidays else they're ringing social services 😀
Good for you Peyote. Not giving your kids the holidays that you would like to because you feel duty bound to a system designed to extract the maximum amount of cash out of you is clearly the responsible grown-up thing to do.
Good for you Graham S, making numerous assumptions about my life and choices based on your own prejudices and desires!
And you know me how?
I don't know you, but have met plenty of entitled a'holes with the same attitude.
We live in a society where there are rules that help us all rub along together as best we can. You chose (I assume) to have a kid, so unfortunately a few more of those rules apply to you. But you're cool, you're a rebel. The 'Man' can't make you do the same stuff as everyone else, can he.
What if you didn't choose to have a kid? Should term time holidays be allowed if your pregnancy was unplanned?
And you know me how?
I don't know you, but have met plenty of entitled a'holes with the same attitude.We live in a society where there are rules that help us all rub along together as best we can. You chose (I assume) to have a kid, so unfortunately a few more of those rules apply to you. But you're cool, you're a rebel. The 'Man' can't make you do the same stuff as everyone else, can he.
🙄 🙄 🙄
Ok, cut out the 'you chose...' bit. Replace it with 'you have a child'!
And you know me how?
From what you posted. Which made you sound like a Plonker [s]pointer[/s]
Do keep up. 😀
Which made you sound like a pointer.
[img] 
[/img]
What if you didn't choose to have a kid? Should term time holidays be allowed if your pregnancy was unplanned?
Really Mols? I think if you didn't choose to have a kid, but accepted it anyway, then you have to accept the responsibility that entails.
If you didn't choose, and didn't accept it, then it falls under the care of the social services surely?
My children have a far higher attendance rate than their teachers.
Personally, I wouldn't think twice about taking my children out of school for up to a week if it was necessary subject to their educational needs being met by some home schooling to catch up. The government will do anything to divert attention from the mess they have created in our education system and there are plenty more imprtant things to get steamed up about. I'll pay the fine and that will be that - small beer compared to the thousands I already pay out on kids activities/tutoring etc
One of my daughters school runs a tern time ski trip the other a term time PGL holiday - but obviously thats different of course and vital to their educational wellbeing...
Really Mols?
No, not really. It was a hypothetical question for the purposes of debate.
Personally, I wouldn't think twice about taking my children out of school for up to a week if it was necessary subject to their educational needs being met by some home schooling to catch up
That's why it should be discretionary - the teachers know the kids and usually the parents and should be able to make a judgement on whether or not the kid will be able to catch up or will be able to do work whilst away.
Good for you Graham S, making numerous assumptions about my life and choices based on your own prejudices and desires!
Hey you're the one announcing that compromising is [i]"what being an adult with responsibilities is all about."[/i]
At the end of the day no one is going to reward you for sticking doggedly to the rules to your own detriment.
That said, you'll notice how private schools stagger their spring half terms so parents can get those cheaper skiing deals..?
Indeed. And of course those with kids in private schools (like MPs) aren't bound by the same rules as the oiks in state schools.
(This has actually been put forward as a good reason to allow turn our local state school into an academy - we can then vary the holidays to get cheaper deals!)
No, not really. It was a hypothetical question for the purposes of debate.
Phew! Hopefully that particular avenue has been covered then!
Hey you're the one announcing that compromising is "what being an adult with responsibilities is all about."
And you'd disagree? I don't think what I wrote was particularly loaded, unlike your response. I'd like to think that the compromises I make aren't detrimental to the life I provide for my kids. From this I assume that you do...
At the end of the day no one is going to reward you for sticking doggedly to the rules to your own detriment.
I don't believe it is to my own or my kids detriment. If everyone followed the example of taking their kids out when they fancied a break I think it would lead to detriment, maybe not to the kids individually (each individual case depending of course), but to the (already faltering) education system.
[quote=molgrips ]What if you didn't choose to have a kid? Should term time holidays be allowed if your pregnancy was unplanned?
I presume there was still a choice made at some point. Make your choices and live with the consequences and the resulting rules.
[quote=winston ]My children have a far higher attendance rate than their teachers.
Wow - so the teachers are off on their holidays in term time? I'd complain about that if I was you.
[quote=GrahamS ](This has actually been put forward as a good reason to allow turn our local state school into an academy - we can then vary the holidays to get cheaper deals!)
It's a piss poor argument - in order to allow some families to get cheaper deals you completely screw up those who have children in different schools (which actually happens to most families for at least one year). Or those who are teachers and have children in a different school - actually maybe that's the issue with the teachers at winston's school where they're swanning off in term time.
I'd like to think that the compromises I make aren't detrimental to the life I provide for my kids. From this I assume that you do...
Yep. I can't speak for you obviously, but yes it is for me.
Sure, "supply & demand",[b] but they can run the flights/hotels/etc at the so called discounted rate just fine [/b]and many still manage to fill up (term time flights I've been on to popular destinations are still full). It's S&D in that it's an opportunity for maximising profit (to be fair, they're a business and usually that's a key point of being in business).
Have ever been in involved in the holiday industry in any sort of financial level? I'm assuming not because this is just not true. The overseas package holiday sector runs at a loss in the low and shoulder periods - it's all about damage limitation. The have access to the hotel and the flight and the staff to run it you need to sign up for the season. If the peak season did not happen the companies would go out of business. They exist for the peak periods. Prices from the remainder of the year are about minimising losses and juggling the 'discount' to get as close to full as possible at a time of year where the product is hard to sell. The tricky bit is balancing the raw cost of the holiday whilst getting the place as full as possible so you create a large captive market for making profits at the bar etc.
In truth the cost of the holiday in the peak periods is closer to the cost to the operators than you might think.
Overall happy with the decision. I think discretion should be with the Head teacher (and this still needs work) and if this had gone through the ability for a parent to put two fingers up. Far too many people who state 'I know what's best for my child' are actually saying 'I know what's best for me'. It did not help that the bloke in question has a reputation locally for being a monumental arsehole of epic proportions and a slap in the face for his ego was always going to be a good thing.
The underlying issue is not new and has been around for decades. Bottom line is that holidays / accommodation costs more during "peak" periods which is, inevitably, when kids are on holiday. Which means that, as a family, you have to budget and plan for your holiday and work within that budget. Sure, we would all like to go on exotic holidays but if we can't afford it then look for something cheaper. We have a fabulous country here with a breadth of diversity and part of the benefit of a holiday is to relax and get away from it all.
What we have seen on this thread is one of the legacies of the 80's culture "It's all about me and **** the lot of you if it interferes with what I want to do!". This has merged with that hideous trait of entitlement to make this situation worse. Yes, I hated having to pay more for our family holiday, so we adapted. And while we think that taking our little princess out of school is no big deal, if you extrapolate that across the class where most of the parents did it but at different times of the term then it makes the teachers job an absolute nightmare and everyone in the class suffers. Peyote made, I thought, a very reasonable post about accepting responsibilities. It's also about respecting other people and their roles as well. That is not sucking up to "The Man". As others have posted, we do not have any divine right to expensive or foreign holidays. Or to go when we want. The "rules" are in place for a reason. You may not like it especially, but that doesn't give you the right to just wilfully disregard them because you don't like them.
Where they are is not the point - on holiday, off sick, on another useless course, they aren't teaching my children and the teaching assistant or supply teacher rarely fills the gap adequately. Safe to say that every time the teacher is off my children are having their education disrupted. This happens at least once a week at primary level and many times at secondary level. Yet apparently if I interupt the magic that is the national curriculum for a personal reason then thats irresponsible
Some of you arguing about being "grown-up" is hilariously ironic.
As ever, the [url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/six-year-old-taken-on-term-time-holiday-will-never-catch-up-on-colouring-20160515108831 ]Daily Mash[/url] have this covered.