Term-time holidays following the High Court decision

[SpencerOrg]

Travelling to WDW is very expensive so the recent High Court ruling on term-time holidays may now open the floodgates to families booking in term time.

This morning a seven day holiday for two adults and two children booked through Virgin Holidays staying at the Rosen Inn International would cost: June £426pp and in August £1578pp.

Clearly market forces, supply and demand influence the price during the year with an average price being in the middle. I don't think anyone in the travel industry is saying that in the long term the 'price rise' in the summer is going to change so this leaves parents with a difficult decision.

Do you take children out of school to enjoy a cheaper / longer holiday at Disney?

Obvious as a huge Disney fan and writing on this website I clearly love Disney Parks and see a huge value in both the experience as a family and simply enjoying the American culture of being in Orlando.

I also see it from the other side as a teacher of nearly 20 years experience. Whilst the old rules were confusing and many people believed that they had an automatic right to 10 days off school a year the new rules offer very little flexibility to Headteachers.

From a financial perspective it is simply a no-brainer when you consider a £60 fine compared to the savings in the price of a holiday. My first time to WDW was in the year 2000 with my wife and her brother, who were both horrified at the extra cost of the holiday because I could only travel in the school holidays.

Will a week of school missed damage a students GCSE chances for the rest of their lives? I really don't think so. There does have to be a big caveat here. If the student took the time off right before an exam or during a controlled assessment then it would have a big impact.

Another perspective which has not been mentioned in the media is the use of Saturday and holiday revision by many schools. Many schools will now insist that students are in school during February and May half term and at Easter for extra revision and intervention. I think this is obviously great for the students as they get more time to revise / catch up on work they need support with. This does send a message though that you can't take term time holidays and you can't really take holidays during half term and Easter so they have to be taken at the most expensive times.

Would I take my children out of school if I could?

Yes but only if they had excellent attendance, it wasn't at a crucial time (one just did their SATs last week!) and I would definitely insist they did work while they were away.

What do you think?

 

[Paula Sedley-Burke]

I think this court ruling left more questions unanswered and more people confused than before. Firstly I don't know if I am allowed to comment as my wife and I are sadly not blessed with kiddos but we would like to have adopted if poss. Anyway wasn't possible but friends and family do have children. We came to Florida at Easter once because we wanted to join my sister and her family. We felt the price increase it was painful! Also the crowds. The parks were like a different world!

I don't think you can make holiday companies charge less as that is called market forces and is the way of the free market.

I do think parents need more say ultimately within reason what is best for their child. Things are getting too far I was annoyed about the sugar tax. I drink a lot of sugary drinks as I am quite underweight. Now I get taxed for it? I bet it won't make any difference to obsessity levels. It's not educational to just ban a substance. What is this Demolition Man lol?

You talk about your delimia about should you or shouldn't you take your kids from school? I think that is a healthy debate to have in your family. Not between a local authority and a court.

It should go back to being up to the head of the school and the parents I think. If the children have a good attendance then they are the best ones to make the call and put together a plan.

Just my view. If it creates extra admin would you as a parent be willing to pay a small admin fee to the school for example? Using a carrot rather than a stick approach? This could cover some work the child might do on holiday, etc. But it is not a fine! Just a fee for their time.

I don't like stick approaches!

 

[Minniesgal]

I actually think it will do the opposite. I think the authorities will realise the rules are ambiguous and open to interpretation and will tighten them and make it harder.

We do try and avoid taking our out during term time but sometimes it is unavoidable.

GCSE year we booked a holiday during the February week off. Then at the end of term 1 the geography teacher announced a compulsory trip that got back a few days into our Florida trip (i.e. using a few days of the leave) so we pushed our trip forward a few days and he missed i think 3 days of school. He got straight As I don't feel too bad about it.

Our last trip was his final year at school but he has an unconditional. His school didn't include Easter during the Easter holidays his brothers school did. I am not allowed leave June July or August, It was working impossible to get them both off at the same time so he missed 4 days of school. All revision days. He is estimated to get As this year too but already has his university place i don't feel too bad.

In either case I do not feel we cost the school anything and i would not be willing to pay an administration fee to the school. He caught up on his own in his own time.

I wouldn't take kids out for 2 weeks to make a trip cheaper but sometimes you can't make trips work at all without taking a few days. i also have sympathy for people who cannot take leave during the school holidays. I think there are wider issues here than just the cost of holidays.

I also think parents are better placed than local authorities or worse central government to decide whats is in the best interests of their children. I would never have taken mine out at all if I didn't know he could cope. I know some parents do not prioritise kids needs but most do and all should not be treated as useless parents needing big brother just because a small number do.

 

[BudgieMama]

I think it will get tightened up in law.

The child in the court case was taken on two different holidays during term time by her divorced parents and was "still above 90% attendence". We have all our students aiming for at least 95% attendence, so missing nearly 10% of her schooling sounds like a lot to me.

Would her parents have cancelled either trip if she'd had a bought of flu or a broken limb and her attendence below 90% before the trip? You can't plan for unavoidable absences, so how would it hold up? Could be approved 3 months out with a high attendance level but made to cancel at the last minute because levels have dropped?

Bit disjointed, but I think we'll see a law change to make it clear.

 

[Paula Sedley-Burke]

I think the holiday companies are going to just hike the price of kids across the board. Covering their options. Wouldn't surprise me. Might as well be a family tax.

If they do tighten the rules I think you might get a situation like the poll tax people my age will recall that!

 

[peachiepie]

I think the holiday companies are going to just hike the price of kids across the board.

I kinda think this is likely to be the outcome. Or just the price of holidays rising in general, not specifically child places.

 

[Paula Sedley-Burke]

I kinda think this is likely to be the outcome. Or just the price of holidays rising in general, not specifically child places.

Yes maybe just spread the cost more evenly over the year. We can dream...

 

[bex7583]

the price differences are huge we are a family of 5 and most times i have priced up to compare the cost has more than doubled !!

i do always try to over lap with a school holiday where possible, my partner is very restricted when he can take time off and its not uncommon for him to have booked a holiday off work that has been approved but then later cancelled. he works away a lot so i am always of the opinion we make the most of any time off we manage to get whether its term or holidays.

i read about this case and ruling online yesterday. I read it the pupils attendance at 93% which her parent seemed to think was good , but sounds rather low to me .

i dont think they should be any firm rule in place, surely each case should be judged individually by the school.I worked in a school until recently and we had a number of children who were late 15-30 mins EVERY day , so surely this soons adds up to equal amount of learning lost but yet no fines given.

when i do take my own children out i make sure any work is caught up or alternative work done. Even though its disney there can be lots to learn , my son did a fabulous project on turtles with the help of a CM in epcot and we even found a turtle nest when in the florida keys on our road trip.

 

[Tash87]

We are taking our daughter (7) out of school for 2 weeks. I'm not overly happy with her having that much time off school but after a meeting with her headteacher he has put my mind at ease.

We agreed she will do the work that she will miss, on the weeks leading up to the holiday as he wanted her to enjoy her holiday and not have to do any work whilst away ( very chuffed parents when he said this ). She is a bright child and can cope with the extra work. It's also very rare that she has time off school due to illness or other holidays.

Her headteacher also said that sometimes it's just as disruptive to have ' odd ' days off here and there.

I agree with you @bex7583 some children are late EVERY day and that soon adds up to days off school.

What my children learn from being in other countries is far more than what they could learn in a classroom about other cultures etc. Just a lot more fun and spending it together.

I hate this saying but YOLO. You never know what's around the corner so enjoy your family!

EDIT: I just wanted to add that her absence is still going to be marked as unauthorised.

 

[dixonsontour]

It will be interesting to see if councils still try to issue fines or will wait until if and when law is changed. Councils have been using the fines as a cash making exercise. It is a shame it has taken until now until someone has had the money to challenge it and been willing to risk a criminal record. You can easily see why so many have just paid the penalty notice.

The law just says child needs to attend regularly. What is regularly isn't in the statute but 93% has been held compliant so it isn't a particularly high standard.

There were 2 cases in Stafford Magistrates Court a few weeks ago where Local Authority were trying to say 95% was required but they couldn't point to any statute that said this it was just the authority's own concoction. Those cases were put on hold pending the high court decision. I suspect the LA will now drop them.

FWIW I can't see government with a very slim majority wanting to push through unpopular legislation when they have more pressing issues.

The thing that hasn't been widely publicised is that the father had an older child who he wasn't fined over. Why because she was privately educated. So he was authorised to take the presumably secondary aged child to Florida but not the 6 year old.

This is the big unspoken thing. Private schools can and do authorise absence so there is no unauthorised absence to report to the LA and no fine. How is that fair? And I say that as the mum of a DD at private school. DD's school operate a these are the exam weeks please avoid them and please keep to a minimum policy but any requests are authorised (same day!)

We have annually had 1/2/3 days tacked onto the 2 week October half term authorised. Reason cheaper flights. At the end of the day I'm best placed to assess matters for DD. She is way ahead academically and has virtually no other time off ill.

 

[Paula Sedley-Burke]

Was thinking though the law needs to be careful it can't go making requirements like 95 % or 90% because what if you book your trip and lets face it for Florida you can't exactly book last minute and then your child attendance drops to 80% because she/he is sick? But it was agreed earlier when it was a better attendance. What you can't go? Loose your DVC points or money etc.

Ridiculous.

 

[P800aul]

Hi

The rules applied to all children the difference we saw in regard to private schools was they were more flexible and councils were not. Schools that are part of an Academy also tended to be more flexible. The only thing that changed was the Head teacher could no longer say "go on then" and give up to 10 days without referring to the higher authority. If a child's attendance was bad and a the term time holiday is requested and refused, even under the old Heads discretion rules, the school could report the parents to the council and a fine was issued.

Now if the school are under local council control all term time holiday requests are unauthorised, they must report you and up to last week a fixed penalty was applied.

We for example take the week prior to the October half term, I save nothing on flights however two weeks is better and more convenient so my wife and I pay the fine for 2 x DD's. The school, at which I'm a governor by the way, can do nothing but report me to the council even though both DD's have attendance greater than 95% over a 12mth period. The last 12 mth attendance was what the High Court used rather than the academic year.

I will be asking for my money back as I have the attendance records on email for both DD's so we will see how that goes

I think Jon Platt's argument is sound which is that, as a parent I would not take my children out of school if it was going to hurt their education, certainly at infants and juniors the last week of the term is rarely used productively, most schools have homework online etc. so I will continue to take both DD's to Disney while they want to go.

We get this time only once !

Regards

Paul

By the way I think the law will change to say an amount of consecutive days are not allowed say 3 days in a row.

 

[k8Davies]

Sorry can I ask a newbie question - as I've got a son he's only 2 and half so still rocking the out of school holidays.

So my question is, the £60 fine, is it for the whole trip or per day.

As if it is just £60 for the whole trip and it's £1000 cheaper, that seems like the better option; although I could be wrong as my parents did take me out of school during term time, so my education has been seriously effected.

 

[P800aul]

Hi

£60 per parent per trip, the trip can be one day or many days. So for us it was 2 DD's £240, £60 each DD X two Parents = £240

Regards

Paul

 

[dixonsontour]

By the time yours is school age k8Davies it will have been revamped. People aren't going to keep paying the 60 a parent per child fixed penalty if they know they will not be convicted in court (i.e child has attendance 93% or higher over previous 12 months) so system will have to be changed.

October is our preferred time too P800aul. My DD was authorised the 3 days off before the 2 week half term by headteacher so no fixed penalty for us. Totally unfair you had to pay and I didn't just because my DD is at a private school.

Someone had done a freedom of information request and I think no fines had been issued to private pupils. Yes technically if a private head got so fed up they reported unauthorised absence the LA could prosecute but in reality the child would be asked to leave the school first. No one is going to pay fees to a school that has reported them for a fine. My authority Lancashire was the highest number of fixed penalty notices I believe.

It is such a shame it has come to this and there must be a better way.

 

[k8Davies]

Thanks @P800aul interesting...

wait a minutes so it would cost for a family of 4 £250 to go in term time, but if we use @SpencerOrg figures

This morning a seven day holiday for two adults and two children booked through Virgin Holidays staying at the Rosen Inn International would cost: June £426pp and in August £1578pp.

and went in term time it could save people £4000 (including taking into account the fine). What, I'm sorry but why are we not revolting about this?

There must be a more sensible solution to this problem as to be fair (I know my one doesn't go to school yet so might change my mind when he does go) If I'm saving that much money, I'd think I'd suffer the fine.

 

[SpencerOrg]

£426 per person

Thanks @P800aul interesting...

wait a minutes so it would cost for a family of 4 £250 to go in term time, but if we use @SpencerOrg figures



and went in term time it could save people £4000 (including taking into account the fine). What, I'm sorry but why are we not revolting about this?

There must be a more sensible solution to this problem as to be fair (I know my one doesn't go to school yet so might change my mind when he does go) If I'm saving that much money, I'd think I'd suffer the fine.

 

[dixonsontour]

Booked as a late deal it is an easy i'll save x and just pay fine decision.

Problem is if you book in advance and then child has chickenpox for 2 weeks plus a 1 week chest infection. If you have booked for June and still go attendance could be very low sub 80%. Authority may just take you to court not just issue the fixed penalty plus education welfare officer involvement.

 

[k8Davies]

wait a minutes so it would cost for a family of 4 £250 to go in term time

Sorry didn't make this clear I meant the fine would be around £240 (although I did but £250 doh), not the trip - see it's because I went away in term time, that's why I cannot articulate my self properly. lol

So term time holiday at £426 would be £1704 plus a £240 fine = total £1944

Going in Holiday time at £1578pp = £6,312

Honestly this is total, total, total madness - someone somewhere needs to be stopped

 

[BudgieMama]

Booked as a late deal it is an easy i'll save x and just pay fine decision.

Problem is if you book in advance and then child has chickenpox for 2 weeks plus a 1 week chest infection. If you have booked for June and still go attendance could be very low sub 80%. Authority may just take you to court not just issue the fixed penalty plus education welfare officer involvement.

This is the big issue in giving a set attendance rate, and I think it's why they tightened it up in the first place. There's a lot of pressure on schools to have decent attendance rates, and I think the government's changes did help save HTs having to be the bad guy... and the blanket "no" is easier to enforce. No fixed attendance rate is going to work perfectly - as even with 100% attendance, there may be some children who will struggle to catch up from a week or two's absence and others who wouldn't, and no-one wants to say to two sets up parents with two very different child with identical attendance rates, "well, your child can go on holiday because she's bright enough to catch up, but other family, your child isn't going to catch up so easily, so she can't".

Can opened. Worms. Worms everywhere.

There's no easy answer either way, sadly, and someone loses out on something!