... to wonder if the school holidays really have to be so long

[Dieu]

Hi all. I should say at the start that I am a former secondary school teacher, so this is most definitely not intended as a school or teacher bashing thread!
I guess I'm fortunate in that, despite being a single parent, I generally work term-time (with some holiday work) and can take my kids along with me. However I do wonder how other parents, particularly those who work full-time, manage everything. You need a medal!
I think the current model is rather outdated. The days of mothers being at home every day to look after the kids, while said kids play outdoors all day, are over.
Many of the parents at my daughters' school seem to be able to work flexibly, but it has to be difficult for those who have no room for manoeuvre where their places of work are concerned. Several families I know have to take separate 'holidays' from work, in order to cover the long summer break. Holiday care can be very expensive.
No judgement, I would just like to know what others think.

I get 5 weeks off a year. DC have a bloody 7 week summer holiday this year! It's crap.
Add in no-kids colleague with chip on shoulder about parents, who wants half term of just for the hell of it to look after her cats, and I am just getting to the end of my working parent tether.

YABVU - they certainly do need to be that long. I already resent my kids spending so long in school, by the time they are home at 1530 - not much left of the day. When I grew up I finished school 1, maybe one day a week at 3. I spent so much time playing with my friends and going to clubs, some of my fondest memories. Hate how my kids don't have the same.

Teachers are not pro rata, but they also don't get paid for the holidays. I am aware this is confusing!

I know this is detracting from the original point but surely teachers are paid a salary and it is accepted that they have long holidays when they don't need to go into work .

And loads of people work 'extra' to their contracted hours - anyone in a 'salaried role' knows that.

I do appreciate teachers work hard ........... but so do lots and lots of people who don't get anything like the same salary or benefits.

Ragwort there are about a zillion other posts on mumsnet saying the same thing - you must know what will ensue

I must be mistaken then, I thought teachers were paid an annual salary, which was pro-rata'd, so although having an annual salary of say, 30,000 they wouldn't actually receive that amount.
My mum is a primary school teacher, she told me that she always gets annoyed when people assume she gets lots of 'holiday' and constantly points out that she doesn't get paid for it!

Also, as to the question in point, I'm definitely of the opinion that kids need the 6 weeks holidays.
They have the rest of their lives to work full time, they might get bored by the end of the summer but that's not necessarily a bad thing..

Also, salaries can still be pro-rata'd, can they not? Or am I being thick?

I'm a teacher and receive a salary. The salary itself is not pro-rata (except when I was part-time), but is calculated on 195 days work + 5 weeks holiday. The remaining weeks of holiday are unpaid. To make it simple for everyone, this amount is split into 12 even amounts for monthly pay.

If I was required to work more than my contracted 195 days (as in contact time with the students), then my rate of pay should go up accordingly. Likewise, if an employee in another sector was told they had to contractually work an additional day per week, you would expect to be paid more.

Thanks Duchess I get it now.

Wow, so realistically even adding one day would cost millions, let alone 2 whole weeks!

I can honestly say that I was never bored during school holidays and Ds1 (yr 11) has never been either. Cutting the summer break would be a bad idea as children need time off school and its better to have it in good weather. I work so am not speaking as someone with no childcare issues.

I only have a child at primary school but I don't notice her being really tired at the end of term. But then she doesn't do many after school activities which may be why others are ready for a break. Some kids seem to be rushing around non stop. (Though I wish DD would choose to do a few more extra curricular activities to broaden her horizons!)

Why is school the only answer to this? There are undoubtedly issues with the length of the holidays for some people, and for some children who don't go home to secure loving homes.
But there are just as many, like me, who don't want even less time for the kids to be at home, wind down, do things other than classroom learning.
Why would we all have to put our kids into school for even longer in order for some people to manage working and child care?
That's not to say that there isn't a need. What I don't get is why school is given as the only possible solution.

If there is funding (which there isn't, but let's pretend!) for schools to be open longer, or provide holiday clubs etc etc, then why not do something totally different with that money instead? Holiday clubs, yes, but in totally different settings, with different goals. Say, a holiday club run at a zoo, to give the kids access to something totally outside the norm. Forest schools are kind of heading in the right direction - more of that sort of thing maybe.

I agree with a pp who asked why we don't look at why it is necessary for both parents to have to work, but I also would love to see people thinking a bit more creatively than "I struggle to provide holiday care. They need to spend longer at school." Some peopl have extolled the virtues of kids spending longer just being kids, doing their own thing. I'm in this camp. I also get that this is not the reality for many children. So why not come up with an option that makes this a reality for them, rather than falling back on sticking them in schools for more and more days?

I can't be more specific because it only occurred to me while reading through the thread, but there has to be a better compromise than increasing formal schooling.

Brandy - I know there have been loads of threads on this but I haven't thought about it so closely before .

I've just been looking at the pay rates for teachers on the NASUWT website (yes, I am bored today ).

I get it from the explanation Duchess has given but really, is it such a big deal .......... surely when you become a teacher you know that you are going to get a salary of £X - divided into twelve payments. Do you really think every time you get your pay .... and I am not paid for Y weeks a year that I cannot work..?.

I regularly work at least two hours a day more than I am paid for (and I earn barely more than the minimum wage) - I accept that, I like the job, it suits my lifestyle and is pretty much the norm for the industry I work in, if I didn't like it I would get out. Don't the majority of teachers think like that?

I am not saying that teachers don't work very hard, of course they do.

baby you make some good points and I did mention further up the thread that a group of volunteers (connected to a church) where I live had set up provision to provide lunches for school children who would normally receive free school meals, this is something that people forget when they talk about having lovely long holidays .......... it's not lovely for a lot of children, particularly from lower income families.

The use of food banks goes up considerably when children are off school. .

Ragwort I have never claimed to be bothered at all about the unpaid holiday thing. It often comes up that people mention teachers' long holidays with full pay and teachers inevitably correct this.
You may not have thought much about this before, bit ice had it rammed down my throat many times!

Ragwort

Would you be willing to work and extra 8(ish) weeks that you are not paid for?

Basically, yes, full-time teaching jobs are full-time, but are worked out on the basis of 195 days officially worked.

If a teacher officially worked 205 days - which is what would happen if the holidays were shrunk by just 2 weeks - they'd need to be paid on that basis.

As everyone else has been saying. :)

A teacher's salary would be different every month if it were paid according to the schooldays actually worked that month. e.g 12 days in April, 15 days in May, 20 days in June, 15 days in July, 0 days in August etc. It's paid in twelve equal instalments for administrative ease.

Boney - I do .

I am contracted (and paid) to work 21 hours a week - I regularly work 30 hours a week - 9 extra hours a week - for which I am not paid. By my maths that's approx 8 weeks (at my part time hours) a year.

Anyway, this argument is going round in circles so I won't go on about it anymore. .

If there were fewer weeks of holiday I think there would be an even greater struggle to recruit new teachers - it is one of the massive perks of teaching! There would be many more leaving the profession due to stress as well.

Right, then by my Maths I should have broken up for summer round about March.

Ragwort I'm a part time teacher, 3 days a week equivalent. My working week is roughly 40 hours and I'm in school Mon-Fri.

I think children, particularly very young children, need a long break at the end of the year. My reception child certainly does.

For the average working parent, the nursery years are the easy time, when your very small child goes to nursery 46 or 47 weeks a year, from 8am to 5/6pm. Then all of a sudden you have to deal with 12 weeks holiday, and schooling from 9am to 3pm. It is very difficult for working parents, unless you have family who can help a lot. And it's probably harder when they are younger, as they may not cope so well with new environments.
I would like to see a lot more holiday clubs based in the school, but with more extra-curicular activites and days out. Should be subsidised for low income families. I would also like to see more residential style camps, like they do in America (I used to go on an excellent week with the church staying at a convent, it was great!) to free up time for the family to spend together as a whole, rather than each parent having to take time separately with the children to cover the full school holidays...

Schools already cost lots of money. Less holidays would cost much more to the taxpayer. For those without children, this is unlikely to be acceptable just to make parents life easier. If it were shown to be beneficial to the children it might be easier to sell.

What we really need is a system where parents can afford to (and are allowed to) take unpaid leave during the holidays. Don't know how that would work for businesses though.

Ragwort

The last working time survey said that teachers (on average) worked up to 60 hrs a week (up to 80 for primary), teachers get paid for 1265 contact hours, by my math that mean that they are already up to their paid hours (on average) by week 21 (ish)