School asking for flight details after unauthorised term-time absence abroad

[PersonalData]

We went abroad mon-thu last week, ds (10) was in school the week before and went back on Friday. We let them know and obviously knew it would be unauthorised. As it was 8 sessions we don’t qualify for a fine. His attendance is usually 100%.

They asked on friday before and after for us to provide proof of the flights and other details for ‘safeguarding’ but he was back in school and clearly fine ?? We declined as this is private personal data. They replied back that we must submit the evidence by the end of tomorrow?

Is this usual ?

How would having flight details help with that?

The LA have instructed them since some recent rule changes apparently. They are told if parents ask they have to state it is for safeguarding. They haven’t got round to updating their policies to reflect this . We didn’t need to show anything they said on this occasion they won’t insist as it’s new and not in the policy but if it happens again we won’t have a choice.

Interesting and thanks for the update.

I'm personally still going to insist the "flight details" that most passengers can provide can't prove or disprove anything and the determined could bamboozle the school/LA but this maybe becoming a fashionable request.

Whatever, just a reminder to remember to redacte PNRs and other reference numbers, especially if the info is required before travel.

We all know holiday prices plummet but I suppose its a question of which is the more important. A child's education and daily attendance or a cheap holiday.

I just dont see why its such a problem for OP. School attendance is important and so is the relationship parents have with the school. The child's going to be there for years.

I think there's a point that everybody would reach where the lack of trust from the school/LA becomes a problem for them, but that point may be different for different people. In asking for futher details, the school/LA are indicating that they need evidence and can't just take a parent's word. In that respect it's not a neutral request.

It starts with the dates away from school and the fact it's an unapproved holiday
It becomes
the destination
the flight numbers
the tickets/purchase confirmation
the boarding cards

all of which can be easily faked so you've "proved" nothing. It burdens the "honest" parent and doesn't actually solve the problem of potential abuse. Extra data collection here just creates a bigger haystack for needles. It needs to be proportionate and useful and this is neither. How far down the road of "just provide the information and your problem goes away" do we go before it becomes intrusive? Daily video calls to check you are where you said you'd be? Every step is a small step and I think this is a step towards undermining the relationship between schools and parents.

If you're at the point where you think a parent might be going to the level of planning to harm their child (and booking time in advance for their injuries to recover) or leaving them at home alone or flying to another destination, then all the "evidence" you can ask for still relies on the parent providing accurate information so you're no further forward.

In this instance it's for a holiday, but it could be for an illness or bereavement.

School attendance is important but we already have pretty draconian punishments (fines and imprisonment) for those who don't comply.

@CheeseNPickle3

".......all of which can be easily faked so you've "proved" nothing. It burdens the "honest" parent and doesn't actually solve the problem of potential abuse"

Very much agree....

" Extra data collection here just creates a bigger haystack for needles."

Agree with that as well...

Frankly it all looks performative...

I think what people are missing here is that school have a very specific set of processes to follow that don’t just respond to unauthorised absences but also have to build evidence for if there needs to be future legal action.

Also, if people are going to be petty about it they might want to bear in mind that there are still parts of the process that are at the heads discretion so they might risk them being a jobs worth in the future.

I actually think the rules are far too harsh and for the most part parents should be allowed to make an informed decision about the benefits of spending time together as a family, resting and experiencing new things. This isn’t affordable during the school holidays for a lot of families but it’s very hard to police this nationally. I know some schools locally who are timing their training days around the holidays to create opportunities for term time holidays without a fine.

@Scrimblescromble

"I think what people are missing here is that school have a very specific set of processes"

What we are not missing, however, is that parents do not have processes, or laws or regulations obliging them to satisfy the schools' processes.

Well they can choose what they do and don’t engage with that’s true. If in some hypothetical situation where things reach the point of legal intervention the evidence shared would be that parents did not provide the necessary documentation which would indicate that they have not complied with the processes and wouldn’t work in their favour in court

They’re often not schools processes. They’re set out in national policy. For example the wording on letters sent out to families re- attendance have to have specific wording to ensure it has all been followed to a T should it ever reach a court arena

You are surely not suggesting that a parent can be prosecuted for failing to provide a travel itinerary.

What sort of court action are you hypothesising?

I’ve worked in areas adjacent to attendance for 20 odd years. I have worked with many parents who have been taken to court and fined hundreds of pounds due to persistent non attendance. I’ve worked with two mothers who have received and served prison sentences for it. All attendance interventions have to start in the same way as if it could potentially escalate to that. Hence often draconian seeming evidence gathering/processes which feel disproportionate to the ‘offence’

Of course blindly following process/instructions despite it being pointed out that they are flawed or wrong has never ended badly....or has it?

Safeguarding is obviously a good thing but It's actually quite worrying that many of those seemingly keen on throwing in the Safeguarding word at any opportunity don't seem to be able to admit the obvious flaws in this particular process...

What does that have to do with a mobile phone policy in a school?!

Of course you got your teeth whitened 🤣🤣

Why are you hell bent on making the schools job harder?! They have enougg to do educating every child and safeguarding them.

Yes the rules around holidays in term time are ridiculous and im a teacher (!) But the fact is you broke the rules so now at least have the decency to accomodate what the school needs for paperwork.

Either you value and trust them with your child, or you dont, and if you dont value them, move your child to a different school!

Yes teachers have nothing better to do than discuss flight details at lunch 🙄

The irony is the people that worry about schools/data/trust etc probably have a tik tok account 🤣🤣🤣

Ah, you mean you are suggesting that the OP is guilty of persistent non attendance.

On what grounds do you base that suggestion?

So what would you do if someone said they spent the week in Cornwall?

Is that a different approach to flying to Majorca?

So a load of bollocks then, as most posters surmised.

I think if you reread my replies you’d be able to figure that out yourself unless your comprehension skills are particularly poor

This feels like a disingenuous question. I’m sure you can figure it out yourself

They are.

By the same token, it's possible that I might try to rob a bank tomorrow. Some people do. Who's to know I won't?

Just to help in any potential prosecution, should I provide a daily table if my movements and activities to the police?

It's clearly a question intended to highlight the evident weakness of your position.

it’s not my position. I’m explaining the context for why schools can appear to take disproportionate action for an unauthorised absence. You can look this up easily.

I’ll break it down for you and explain it sloooowly - although I suspect you’re choosing to misunderstand.

Schools cannot predict whether an unauthorised absence will be a one off or the first of many.

They cannot time travel if they thought it was a one off and it turned out not to be

They legally have to treat every episode of unauthorised absence in the same way and follow a rigorous legal process

This is because if it becomes persistent absence then they have to have followed all the processes from day 1 for their evidence to hold up in court, not all cases escalate this way. The vast majority do not.

There is no way of knowing which will so all will be treated in the same way.

do you need me to break it down any further?