New £60 Fines For Taking Children On Holiday During School Term (No 10 Days Grace)!

peachyprice

Murphy_The_Cat wrote: »

I got the initial letter a week or so ago and and the follow up letter yesterday. We also have had a conversation with the Head and sadly, they are going to follow the party line.

Thats a shame really, as it will threaten to dampen a previously positive & productive relationship that we enjoy with the school.

It will be interesting to me to see if they follow this criteria
Penalty Notices for term time holidays can be issued if
 There have been 10 sessions (5 consecutive days) or more of
unauthorised absence due to a holiday taken during an academic
year; and
 Attendance is below 90% during the preceding 12 school weeks
before the holiday was taken; or
 The holiday was taken during the month of September; or
 The holiday was taken during tests or examinations; or
 It is the second holiday taken in any one academic year; or
 The pupil is in Year 6 or Year 11

So, if your children have above 90% attendance and are not in yr6 or yr 11, or you start your holiday on a Monday or end it on a Thursday only missing 8 sessions, or you tag those 8 sessions onto a half term/Easter for a longer break, or you don't go in May, June or September, and only go once a year, you won't get fined.

Like Mr Wang said, hysteria over nothing much.

Murphy_The_Cat

peachyprice wrote: »

So, if your children have above 90% attendance and are not in yr6 or yr 11, or you start your holiday on a Monday or end it on a Thursday only missing 8 sessions, or you tag those 8 sessions onto a half term/Easter for a longer break, or you don't go in May, June or September, and only go once a year, you won't get fined.

Like Mr Wang said, hysteria over nothing much.

Which would be very fair and reasonable IF, the Head of my school was implementing that structure. Sadly, from our current conversations, they aren't implementing that structure.

When I get the chance next week, I'll print that it6em out and invite feedback from her. :beer:

gingerdad

Murphy_The_Cat wrote: »

For me, the enormous difficulty is that I own a small company that is highly seasonable, in a tourist area -- and trying to fit everyones holiday within the times that the schools find convienient for them is impossible.

I wonder if I become a convert to the Church Of The latter Day Saints I could get away with going to the American Mid West in term time each year on religious grounds

I'm with MTC as in roughly the same area and my business is totally dependent on tourists and thus very very busy during all the holidays (except Christmas).

So for me it'll be budgeting the fine into my holiday plans and the same for quite a few friends, its just a money making scheme for the government, i can't see in most cases taking a short time out of the school year makes any difference.

GD

richardw

Could some schools have a 'fine' in terms of the child and parents doing a project on 'Wot Eye lurrn't on me 'olliday'? and if it ain't up to standard, no more time off for holidays?

peachyprice

Murphy_The_Cat wrote: »

Which would be very fair and reasonable IF, the Head of my school was implementing that structure. Sadly, from our current conversations, they aren't implementing that structure.

When I get the chance next week, I'll print that it6em out and invite feedback from her. :beer:

So the school are making up their own? Can they do that?

Our is set by the LEA and is the same as above.

Murphy_The_Cat

peachyprice wrote: »

So the school are making up their own? Can they do that?

Our is set by the LEA and is the same as above.

To date -- the info has come from the Head and it is the policy that is being followed by all of the schools in our 'cluster'. I've not managed to find the 'official' word from our LEA yet.

If the 'official' word is as above, I can live with that its certainly not ideal for my family, but I can work with it.

N1AK

Valli wrote: »

But when everyone else is moaning about paying penalties teachers have to take their holidays during holiday time. When it's more expensive.

Surely that's why teachers should be in favour of allowing children to take non-disruptive holidays outside of holiday periods. If more kids are on holiday in term time then the price premium during the holiday period would fall making the teacher's holidays cheaper :beer:

peachyprice

N1AK wrote: »

Surely that's why teachers should be in favour of allowing children to take non-disruptive holidays outside of holiday periods. If more kids are on holiday in term time then the price premium during the holiday period would fall making the teacher's holidays cheaper :beer:

Nice theory, but it hasn't made a blind bit of difference for all these years term time holidays have been allowed.

daveyjp

The change now states holidays can only be taken under 'exceptional circumstances'. No definition of course. See you in Court headteachers as it will take a few cases to define what it means.

gregg1

notanewuser wrote: »

That's not quite true.

Schools must open for 190 days a year. Teachers are paid an annual salary based on 195 days a year. The schools are closed to pupils on training days, but the teachers are not on holiday.

Yes it is true. The trainings days were originally holidays.