Supreme Court: Parents CAN'T take kids on term-time holiday without risking a fine

clint_S

A couple of things grate me about this decision


- Most other Western countries allow children to take 10 days for holidays during school terms with no consequences. it's common in the USA and Denmark even encourages it. A lot of these countries are rated higher than the UK in Education tables.
- Most Holidays are taken the week before or after school holiday, during this time most schools aren't teaching unless playing board games is how far the education has fallen.
- A lot of school have different holiday timetables, My daughter is off for Easter holidays this week my sons don't break up until next week.

esmy

Pricivius wrote: »

- The Lion King is based on Hamlet. Probably a bit wasted on junior school kids, but very interesting to secondary school kids studying Shakespeare. Other modern movies are based on classic books so watching a film is not necessarily the waste of time you might think it is.

Do you imagine that there would follow class discussion about the film,drawing comparisons with Hamlet etc etc?? I very much doubt it.

My school experience (sixties and seventies) was that the entire school was parked in the hall to watch Jiminy Cricket films, one after the other, for a week. They had a moral message but I don't recall any other input at all.

My children (90s and 00s) spent almost two weeks at secondary school not wearing uniform,watching films, playing games and being let out early.

They were never taken out in term time but I wouldn't have had any qualms doing so in those weeks.

Red-Squirrel_2

WestonDave wrote: »

They would on flights because you'd have everyone from say Bristol wanting flights out of Bristol on the same weeks. However part of the problem is that largely we have the same holidays as most of Europe - all on the outdated basis of some religious festivals and getting the harvest in during August.


We know kids are in school 190 days which is 38 weeks. The remaining 14 weeks are generally split as 6 weeks summer, 2 weeks each at Christmas and Easter and 3 half term weeks. The remaining week gets used up on Bank Holidays or odd days at the start or end of the summer holidays. The problem really is the 6 week summer holiday when everyone wants a holiday but we're competing with the whole of Europe for those hotel rooms etc. The other downside to the current system is that over the 6 week break kids forget some stuff and get out of routine so teachers waste time getting them back up to speed - plus certainly in the two long 7 week half terms before Christmas kids tend to get over tired and ill.


What if we took the 14 weeks off and split that into equal holidays - 7 lots of two weeks off, with either 5 or 6 weeks school in between. Starting with the same Christmas holiday as now, we'd end up with a two week break mid Feb (where the current half term is), another 2 weeks at the start of April (might hit Easter or might not), another 2 weeks that would come at the end of May, start of June around when the current May half term week lands. We'd then get 2 weeks in early July meaning we'd get away before the rest of Europe, and a couple of weeks in September after the rest of Europe have gone back to school with the equivalent to the October half term then being 2 weeks in November breaking up that long slog of the Autumn term.


That's just back of a fag packet stuff but if fine tuned a bit I reckon you could cut holiday costs by not clashing with Europe and also improve school performance by breaking up the long terms and the long summer holiday.

Good luck getting your annual leave for any of those 4 weeks then, particularly the 2 in July which will be the most in demand.

System

My kids are 4 and 2, so not in school yet. They go to playschool (3 afternoons for the little one, 5 afternoons for the older one) and we don't take them on holiday during term time. I don't imagine we ever will once they're at school either, and I don't remember ever missing school for a holiday when I was a kid. The idea of taking kids out of school for a cheap holiday has always been completely alien to me, and I'd never even realised people did it until the fines came in.

When I was a kid we went on camping and caravan holidays, except for one special trip to Disneyland Paris, which my mum spent months saving up for. Now I have children, we go on one holiday in the UK each year, and other holidays are spent doing day trips. The kids get plenty of culture, and we have lots of lovely family time together. I've never understood why people think they have to go abroad to spend time as a family.

For me, it's not just about the disruption to other children's learning, or their own. It's also about following the rules and instilling an attitude that school/work/other commitments should come first.

The argument often comes up that kids don't do anything in the last week of term anyway, but I don't really agree with that. They may not be learning anything academic, but I remember those last few days being a chance to interact with my peers and teachers in a more easygoing way, which helped me feel more engaged with school, and see my teachers as real people. I think kids gain more from those relaxed periods than most people give credit for, and as long as they're not happening all the time (which I don't think they are, unless times have changed since I was at school!) then I think they can be beneficial.

I think there should be exceptions for families who genuinely can't take annual leave during term time because their jobs don't allow it, because family time is important. Otherwise, people should either send their kids to school and follow the rules accordingly, or take their kids out and homeschool them.

ETA: I don't think individual headteachers should make the decision. There's too much room for inconsistency. There should be a clearly defined set of criteria for when an absence can be authorised, applied nationally.

jamesd

phillw wrote: »

That sentence is vague. Evidence of that is the previous court cases in his favour.

Yes, it is and the reason this went to the Supreme Court was to remove the ambiguity and decide whether the presence of the word "regularly" has any meaning and what that meaning is. The court in effect decided that the sentence should be read as though the word regularly wasn't present in it, ruling that it means as declared by the school, just as it would if the word wasn't there at all.

I think that the decision was wrong because I don't think that the word should have been treated as if it wasn't there. Parliament can remove the word if desired and the court should have suggested that it do so, while ruling that the wording was impermissibly ambiguous and there was no case to answer.

jamesd

unholyangel wrote: »

I can't recall any of the previous courts saying its okay to take your kids out of school to save some money on the price of a holiday - the courts were ruling on statute, not on the fathers morals/principles.

The Supreme Court decision extensively quotes from past decisions and practices which have in effect done so by ruling that things like 90% overall attendance would qualify as regular. In its decision it directed that those past verdicts should be disregarded and may not be used as precedents to the extent that they conflict with their ruling that regularly in effect means nothing more than the sentence would mean as if the word wasn't there.

The decision did not remove the discretion in the areas of what heads should report, what discretion should be exercised in issuing penalty notices, what discretion should be used in deciding to prosecute and what discretion magistrates have in dismissing cases without penalty. All of those options remain available to be used.

One case where I think that they are likely to be used is if a child takes a day off school that is a holiday for their religion but not that of either parent. The parents are committing an offence if that happens because the law only prescribes it as being legal for their religion, without regard for the religion of the child.

maman

x-caitlin-x wrote: »

My kids are 4 and 2, so not in school yet. They go to playschool (3 afternoons for the little one, 5 afternoons for the older one) and we don't take them on holiday during term time. I don't imagine we ever will once they're at school either, and I don't remember ever missing school for a holiday when I was a kid. The idea of taking kids out of school for a cheap holiday has always been completely alien to me, and I'd never even realised people did it until the fines came in.

When I was a kid we went on camping and caravan holidays, except for one special trip to Disneyland Paris, which my mum spent months saving up for. Now I have children, we go on one holiday in the UK each year, and other holidays are spent doing day trips. The kids get plenty of culture, and we have lots of lovely family time together. I've never understood why people think they have to go abroad to spend time as a family.

For me, it's not just about the disruption to other children's learning, or their own. It's also about following the rules and instilling an attitude that school/work/other commitments should come first.

The argument often comes up that kids don't do anything in the last week of term anyway, but I don't really agree with that. They may not be learning anything academic, but I remember those last few days being a chance to interact with my peers and teachers in a more easygoing way, which helped me feel more engaged with school, and see my teachers as real people. I think kids gain more from those relaxed periods than most people give credit for, and as long as they're not happening all the time (which I don't think they are, unless times have changed since I was at school!) then I think they can be beneficial.

I think there should be exceptions for families who genuinely can't take annual leave during term time because their jobs don't allow it, because family time is important. Otherwise, people should either send their kids to school and follow the rules accordingly, or take their kids out and homeschool them.

ETA: I don't think individual headteachers should make the decision. There's too much room for inconsistency. There should be a clearly defined set of criteria for when an absence can be authorised, applied nationally.

Good points.
I agree that teaching your children, by example, that following rules is important is a key principle. I believe that's what the judges were focusing on yesterday.
There also seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about people who find it difficult to take leave. Children have 13 weeks of holidays so very few parents could have none of these.
There is a need, to an extent, to let individual headteachers make decisions about what are exceptional circumstances as it would be difficult to make an exhaustive list but all would need to work within the law.

I like to think of it in reverse. What would happen if these same parents (that take their children out of school) chose not to turn up for work when it wasn't their leave time? Surely they'd expect their employer to apply a sanction.

mgdavid

maman wrote: »

Good points.
.............
I like to think of it in reverse. What would happen if these same parents (that take their children out of school) chose not to turn up for work when it wasn't their leave time? Surely they'd expect their employer to apply a sanction.

Exactly.
Even better can you imagine the howls of anguish from parents if their children were sent home from school because a teacher had decided to take a week or two's holiday during term-time?

lush_walrus

It's interesting that whenever this subject is raised, parents in agreement with taking their child out of school during term time think it's appropriate to question the school rather than question the travel industry. Why not focus the energy in trying to attain a fairer pricing structure than trying to justify weeks at school are of no consequence to your child's learning programme.

The UK is very fortunate to have free education, if you don't think so try talking to those who have come here from countries who do not benefit. Like anything free people do not seem to be able to respect it
Surely the least a parent can do for their child is to ensure their child is available to attend for the school year. Yes package holidays are more expensive during school holidays but why is that the fault of our education system, why should teachers have to focus on your child to bring it back in line with others because you wanted to get a cheap deal to one of the Costas. Let's face it most of the UK do not spend their holidays on an inca trail, they spend it laying next to a pool.

If you really believe it doesn't make a difference and your child will attain the same knowledge whether in school or not have a look at attendance levels of school where academic success is paramount such as grammar schools.

We choose to pay for our children's education, term time holidays just do not feature in ours or the other parents from schools minds. For us every day at school is important and part of a planned educational route.

I do wonder if the same parents arguing for term time holidays were paying for their children's education they would hold the same opinion, I hassard a guess not.

peachyprice

maman wrote: »

There also seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about people who find it difficult to take leave. Children have 13 weeks of holidays so very few parents could have none of these.

Sorry, I have to pick up on this point, because it's simply not true.

My husband works in the public sector, along with 25,000 other people. He has a very generous 8 weeks holiday a year, allocated on a 5 year rota. Two of those years have NO holiday in school holidays, that 10,000 people every year in the London area who have no holiday in school holidays.

This year we're lucky, he has one week (of those 8) that coincides with May half term. Next year I believe is a good one, 3 weeks in July/August. So it's swings and roundabouts.

Having said that we've never used that as a reason to take our children out of school, when they were all at school I used to take them with my mum, now it's just my daughter we go just the two of us.