AIBU? DS was ill and the school have marked it as an unauthorised holiday and are threatening to fine me!

[WeAreEternal]

A couple of weeks ago DS (7) had an upset stomach, he D&V over night and most of the next day.
First thing in the morning (a Thursday) I called the school and let them know he was ill.
He was feeling better by the evening but as he had D&V school policy is 24 hours off, so I kept him off Friday too.

I received a letter from to school yesterday saying that those days have been marked as an unauthoried holiday as "although we received a phone call from you stating that (DS) was ill, we are led to believe that DS was in fact on a holiday to XXXX on these two dates"

The letter goes on to say that if he was genuinely ill they expect me to provide evidence such as a doctors appointment card, a prescription, a medication receipt or something simmilar that can "verify my version of events".

I am a medical professional, I know when when my DS needs medication or to see a GP or when he just has a bit of a stomach bug and needs rest and fluids.
Who would take a child to the GP or buy medication for D&V anyway?

How on earth can I prove that DS was ill?
And why are they even querying this?
AIBU to think this is bloody ridiculous?

Anyone have any ideas?

Snowbility, the 48 hour rule was not so much about whether the children were fighting fit as whether they were contagious.

Sorry if I've missed this, but have you phoned your local paper - they'd love this and the head would be humiliated!

In the school policy for this year, which is up on their website, it says DC must remain off for 48 hours.

But regardless of whether it should be 24 or not, DS was still suffering symptoms for most of the Thursday, so according to any policy he should not have gone in Friday.

I am not going to contact the local paper (and certainly not the daily fail).
I will however, be contacting the LEA to complain about this entire situation.

Schools are going to lose so much good will like this

My kids have never been ill on the second day, rarely ill during the first 24hrs either but the school refuse to have them back...which is fine it's their right but I wonder am I going to be accused of an unauthorised absence when I take a dc out on the second day because it feels to me that while they can tell me not to bring them to school they should not be allowed to dictate what we do during the 48hrs they will not have them back.

WeareEternal. I have read this thread with a mixture of fascination and horror. I think you are doing brilliantly, and love the great advice you have been given - MN at it's best.

I can't wait to hear how they respond.

Why contact the LA (not LEA - Local Authority) about this when you haven't given the school the chance to respond within the timescale you set in your own letter? Are you letting yourself be wound up by responses on an internet discussion group?
As I've said before, at this stage (and probably at any stage) the LA have NO part to play in this. If you contact them the response will be "what does the school say?" and "have you followed the school complaints policy?". If you are not happy with the Headteacher's response - when they have had a chance to respond by your reasonable deadline - you need to get the school complaints procedure and follow it. The school governors deal with this if you are not happy with what the Head does, not the LA. They do that by forming a panel to hear your complaint. Don't take any notice of people here telling you that you will be brushed off, even if the Head did that, the governors have to take it seriously. And then if you're not happy - you go to the Secretary of State, not the Local Authority.

pekingduck I may be wrong but I think the op means she will contact the LEA once she has a response from the school.

I could be wrong after all a whole week has passed now and the fact remains the school have failed to get back to the op. Let's not forget the letter was only sent when the school failed to get back to the OP. Despite the letter they have not responded to her request for a call back which I believe she requested more than once. She could complain to the LEA for that alone.

I think Peeking is trying to say (and she has experience of this through her job) that the LA no longer have a legal responsibility to get involved in issues like this so it's pointless writing to them. Might be worth listening to her if she knows what she's on about rather than sending a letter to a body that has nothing to do with the procedure.

I agree that the school has acted so shabbily though. Well done to the op for being this patient. I don't think I would've been

SlicedLemon, I think I've tracked it correctly and the school haven't yet reached the deadline given in Op's letter. Once she made her complaint formal in a letter they'd be unlikely to ring her to be honest, would step back to look into it and respond in writing.
I know exactly what I am talking about regarding the school complaints process. I am trying to advise Op on the most effective and correct way to pursue her complaint. That is not by contacting the Local Authority. They have no legal role to play in this. So she should not complain to the LA at all. If Op needs to take this further the way to do it is to get the school Complaints Procedure - probably on their website as it is a statutory policy. That will direct her on how to contact the governing body and what happens after that.

If not happy with response of the governors complaints panel - the next legal step is the DfE.
Posters are always advising people to complain to the LA (or normally LEA...). That is not good advice. The LA role in most complaints is gone, dead, no longer exists. I deal with this sort of thing all the time...
www.gov.uk/complain-about-school

Thank you Bit - that is exactly what I'm trying to say.
In an old job I had responsibility for a LA to deal with all escalated school complaints. I would not even look at them until the complainant had followed the school's complaints procedure, which 90% of the time was effective and sorted them out.

So I can assure people first-hand that there is no longer anyone in LA's carrying out that role, because legally it is not required. Exception is Child Protection issues and in some cases complaints about the curriculum.

Don't contact the DfE until the complaints procedure has been followed, they will also want to know that the school has had a chance to respond through their procedures. (If an Academy I believe that the Secretary of State is the last stage, but haven't got time to look that up. It will be in the schools complaints procedure...).

Every single time I read a thread where a parent is unhappy about something a school has done on here and wants to take it further I advise them - get the complaints procedure and follow it. All schools have one, it's a statutory requirement. The problem so often is that parents go all scatter-gun. They start by complaining to the teacher, then wind themselves up overnight and decide that's not enough so leave messages for the Head to ring them, then maybe they decide the Head hasn't jumped high enough or fast enough and they wizz off a letter. Now, once it is put in writing I would certainly advise a school to treat that as stage 1 of a complaint and go formal. Meaning the parent isn't going to get that quick-response chat with the Head. Instead the Head is going to start to follow the deadlines in the complaints procedure and prepare their response more formally.

Final word - this is not an urgent matter for the school. Who knows what else they are having to deal with this week? They have an unhappy parent and they'll look into that. But it's unreasonable to expect schools to jump (how high??) over something like this. Honestly, it is.

The school have acted shabbily. Isn't it ironic that the school see fit to attack a parent for failing in their responsibility while failing in their own to deal with the situation appropriately, shows a complete lack of professionalism - even if the op had taken her child out of school for a holiday, she deserves to discuss the matter within a reasonable time frame - you can't just send a threatening letter to someone and leave the issue hanging around - where's the humanity? Dh couldn't behave like this in his job, if he issued a disciplinary, he'd have to be around to answer to it, regardless of how busy he was. The arrogance is breath taking.

a) We only know one side of the story.
b) It's only a week since Op got the original letter from the school, and less than that since she wrote to the school expressing her complaint formally.
c) I work in a lot of schools, I mean a lot. No headteacher I know would send a letter with such a specific allegation in it without being very sure of their ground. And if they realised they had made a mistake they would apologise.
d) Having also worked in HR, I would say that if a manager issued a "disciplinary" they would be around to answer it but they'd be very unwise to do so in haste and in an informal phone call. They would set up proper meetings and follow a timescale set out in a procedure.

I think that's my last on this thread. I hope I've given some useful info for future reference. What I'm seeing here at the moment is tinged with mass hysteria.

They have an unhappy parent and they'll look into that. But it's unreasonable to expect schools to jump (how high??) over something like this. Honestly, it is.

But the OP is not asking them to jump (how high??). She is asking for a response from them after they instigated proceedings by sending her the letter. She firstly requested a call back, and was told no one was available until a certain day. That day came and went and she got no phone call. Therefore she put her complaint in writing with a reasonable time scale. I appreciate that now the school will probably wait until the very end of the deadline before responding, but at the same time I don't think that suggesting the OP is over reacting and that she is merely an 'unhappy parent' is really fair. When they sent the letter they must have realised that the OP would want to discuss it, (after all, most complaints procedures will tell you to talk to the school about matters first) but despite several requests by the OP the school have not made themselves available for that discussion. I don't see how the OP's subsequent action can be seen as expecting the school ' to jump (how high??) '.

Peeking I do try and pay attention. To be gair to the op, she is being quite calm and patient as well so I hope it all ends satisfactorily

But it's unreasonable to expect schools to jump (how high??) over something like this. Honestly, it is.

Seriously? On the face of it, you have a member of staff listening to gossip and using that as a basis for threatening a parent with legal action, legal action predicated on the allegation that the parent is a liar. Indeed, the member of staff has already, essentially in terms, accused the parent of being a liar. That's a pretty major situation, I would say.

And although you're right that parents tend to wind themselves up, rather in the manner of middle-aged couples at check-in desks thinking that shouting a bit more will make the delayed plane on time, the reputational risk is pretty substantial: were the parent to get in sufficient a tizzy as to go to the local newspaper, the school would get to look stupid in a manner which doesn't have the constraints of a formal complaints procedure.

So were I the head, I'd want to close the situation down as quickly as possible. Waiting until the last day of the complaints procedure timescale is a high-risk strategy, because the parent is not obliged to remain within the complaints procedure.

peekingduck

If you accuse someone of lying, it is polite to actually speak or contact them about it when they query it.

Like I said before - either the OP is telling the truth or the school is.

The very least the school can do is get someone to acknowledge the OP in some way. To be told when she first queried it that no one was available but someone could speak to her 4 days after her initial complaint is awful communication.

Good relationships between parents and schools is so important. The school haven't shown good communication skills.

And... if they've done wrong the governors will uphold the complaint when it comes before them. Governors can be pretty "challenging" of Heads, and they don't like spending time (and often money on clerking and admin) on complaints panels that shouldn't have got to that stage.

What a weird situation! I hope the school gets their act together and resolves this quickly.

Peeking, the fact is all of this could have been avoided if the head had bothered to see the OP, or at the very least, phone back when they were meant to.

OP has been very patient. I think if someone threatened to fine me over something I hadn't done, I'd be rather annoyed.

I think that if a school is going to accuse a parent, in writing, of being a liar then perhaps they should make some time on their busy schedules to allow the patent to set the record straight.

You cannot casually send out threatening letters and them expect to continue ticking boxes in peace without your correspondent contacting you wishing to defend themselves.

It's very patronising to expect 'the little people' to STFU until the school feels ready to speak to them about the allegations it's made. If the school is too busy to deal with the consequences of its actions it shouldn't have sent the letter in the first place.

Some parents I know would have been in reception and would have demanded to see the Head there and then.

A head can always find time. It's what they get paid for.

This is insane. Someone has cocked up and they are hoping you will go away if they ignore you.

I can't see evidence anywhere that the school or anyone else is expecting little people to STFU.

I see a school that has handled an issue with a parent badly.

That can be dealt with, schools must be held to account by the governing body and there are processes in place to do that. However, as Op herself set a deadline that hasn't yet passed, she probably needs to wait for that to happen before she does anything else.

p.s. See I wouldn't have faffed about leaving messages or asking for phone calls. I'd have started the formal complaints procedure on the day I got that letter, it's not difficult. That would get things moving more quickly.