Supreme Court sides with government on term-time holidays

[Mulledwine1]

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0155-judgment.pdf

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0155-press-summary.pdf

AIBU to get the popcorn out for the discussion of why this is/is not a great judgment?

I can understand the chaos if everyone took their kids out all the time, (though i imagine two weeks at early primary level would have little effect imo) so its the right decision that way.

Think the main issue is that parents shouldn't be taking the brunt of holiday costs for everyone, so the costs should be more fairly spread out by holiday companies throughout the year if parents aren't allowed flexibility about when to go on holiday.

Its easy to say "save more" but when a none-parent can go for a UK lodge holiday one week and then the cost for a parent/anyone tied to school hols is trebled the week after, it can hardly be called fair, even if holidays for parents anyway aren't a "right". Who cares if you've got 13 weeks to choose from when the cost for even a caravan holiday becomes crippling.

I wonder what happens to the fine money and if it gets reinvested into the school.

like i said its not a right to go on holiday

what if all the teachers decided they wante to go in term time aswell if the ruling had gone the other way

I find it interesting that in secondary schools you can miss parts of lessons every week for musical instrument lessons. It is the same day but at different times so effects different lessons every week.

In my friend's school they go abroad to a city in Europe for those in the choir. This takes place within term time leaving behind the vast majority of year 7s still working. There are no lessons on this trip, just singing, shopping and sight seeing.

It is this inconsistency that infuriates me. Either education is important or not. Schools themselves should not get to pick and choose.

The fines certainly don't go to the schools, they are retained by the local authority that levied them. Im not sure but i would guess they are just used to offset the cost of enforcement

The court has not "sided with the government"

It has defined what "regular attendance" means. See this helpful thread:

twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/849910963524575232

It isn't always about money. I live in a seaside town, lots of people work in the hospitality industry and aren't allowed holidays in school holidays. My husband was a senior police officer and his holidays had to fit in with colleagues, if his posting was moved then other officers of his rank might already have holidays booked and he couldn't take holidays then.

I get a bit fed up that people always seem to think this is about a cheap foreign holiday.

School holidays get booked up so quickly in my workplace, along with half terms that some people never get holidays off with their kids.
That puts them in a situation where there can be no choice but to take children out, or not have holidays.

Also, end of term weeks are always a complete waste of time, barely any work gets done so what is the real issue?
Some leeway needs to be given here.

I agree with the Supreme Court.
Also I never went away once until I was 10 and it didn't harm me at all. Holidays are not necessary.

When I was at school in the 90s we were allowed 10 days holiday a year providing attendance was good. I was always taken abroad in term time however I was always playing catch up.

As a consequence I don't take my girls out of school for holidays we have to endure the heat of August.

I wish they could make the May and October holidays a bit longer and shorten the main 6 weeks then I would like to have my holidays then.

"so the costs should be more fairly spread out by holiday companies throughout the year"

Then there still would be higher demand than supply in the holidays! Also there would be lower demand for holidays outside of term time, making running a hotel, resort, flight, meaning that less of them would operate, increasing the costs further.

Really, basic economics.

Me and DP have very different views on this. DP is outraged that anyone can take their kids out of school for a holiday. I think holidays are important and there are some parents who can not take time off during school holidays.

I agree granny we did take our children out of school for 6 days in primary. It was the last week of term and Ds1 had just sat his SATs the week before. I know that they just let the children run free on a day trip, then watch a DVD because the staff are planning etc so very little actual education takes place on that week.

But I paid the fine. And I have only done it once. Ds1 is now 14.

I don't get to dictate when Dh has holiday, in fact he is on a holiday ban for all of March/April/May due to business needs. That leaves us with July and August when it will be stifling hot and I suffer from heat stroke. And yes, I would like to enjoy guaranteed weather so no to the UK.

I wish school holidays were different, less time in the summer and 2 weeks in May. Not that it would benefit me this year

It's not necessarily about the cost of holidays, there are other reasons parents do this. My Dh works a shift pattern that is set in stone for the next 5 years, this year his shift breaks (18 day break after 8 week shift rotation) do not correspond with any of our sons school holidays, the result is this year we don't get a holiday together as a family, not even a long weekend. The same for next year, but quite frankly we have decided that next year we will be taking our son out for a holiday and will pay the fine.
I don't care how much a holiday costs, I'll save up for it, but not having a holiday together for 2 to 3 years is pretty miserable. Time spent relaxing and having fun as a family, making memories is important IMHO. We all need time if just once a year to wind down and spend time together away from the pressures of work, school and general day to day living. What will my son remember more, the holiday he spent with his parents, swimming, fishing etc (whatever we decide to do) or the same week he spent in class? He can catch up with what he missed in class.
If they have good attendance and are not struggling to keep up with their peers then I don't see a problem with it.
I'm not saying todays decision was wrong, but what does bother me is the assumption by a lot of people of a parents reason to take a term time holiday.

My nieces school did a 'geography trip' to New York. It was literally sightseeing, the same as we did when we went on holiday.
Why can they do it and we can't?

Equally, i'll just take them away and then pay the fine if I want to go in termtime.. so meh really.

Schools local to me do a variety of things to make it a bit more flexible. One senior school has two weeks for October half term, they use 5 non pupil days in one go. Another school breaks up a week early in July by doing the same thing and the last week of term is an activity week when they do the majority of school trips, if kids miss that week they aren't actually missing any academic work so they can have 2 weeks off before main holidays without disrupting lessons.

I wouldn't class a wedding as a "special reason" - if you want school age children to attend then don't hold it on a school day during term time!

Sirzy, I don't expect my brother and his intended to make their arrangements around the schooling of my daughters. I would get slammed on MN if I did for one thing!

And it's not an "abroad" wedding as it goes, as I'm travelling to the country of residence of the happy couple. It's me that lives in forrin.

Anyway, my point is, taking a five and four year old out of school for two days for a special family event (they are the only grandchildren/nieces, nephews etc), shouldn't really be an offence that incurs a fine. It's just not going to cause irreparable damage to their education and frankly, if they were sick on those two days, no-one would be complaining about the inconvenience to the school.

And no, I'm not going to lie or ask them to because a) it's wrong and b) there is no way on God's good green Earth either of them are NOT going to spend months talking about being in the wedding (which is why they have not yet been told!)

I'm glad it's gone this way.

Because if it hadn't, we'd have been left with a mess that only those who had been lucky enough not to be ill, and so had 'regular' attendance, would be able to have termtime holidays. And I think that is way unfair. But is what a ruling the other way would actually have meant in practice.

Re the cost.

Yes it's dearer to go in school holidays, but there are deals to be had. Campsites in France Can be good value. Especially if you book direct and You can use Tesco vouchers for the Eurotunnel. Package Prices start to drop towards the end of August, so we have often got a week in then before schools go back. This year we are going away for 13 nights because the flights were nearly £100 per person cheaper to return a day early. It's worth doing some research.

Secondly, if both parents work and have limited annual leave it doesn't make sense to go away in term time and have to pay extra for additional holiday childcare. plus the fine.

grannytomine but then you could make a case to your HT for exceptional circumstances and they decide. That's fair isn't it?

Having a blanket rule and then deciding on a case-by-case basis can be an exception, decided by someone who knows the family and knows the school (HT) seems a good system to me.

I agree with the ruling for secondary schools, but honestly my reception and yr3 kids are not going to be missing much if they are away for the last few days of term. DD missed 2 days this week, she was vomiting after school, so I called the school to say she would be unable to attend the presentation that evening. Receptionist said "Thanks for letting us know, see her in 2 days, we have a 48 hour exclusion policy after instances of sickness or diarrhoea". She was fine the next 2 days but did enjoy the rest..... Teacher enquired after her welfare but did not give any extra work.

I broadly agree with the ruling too.

I don't think it should be generally acceptible for employers (with a few notable exceptions such as the forces) to simply say "no time off in the summer" though. There was a hotel owner on the radio defending that working practise this morning - didn't want to take on one seasonal member of staff to allow all his other staff to take a week's holiday each because "it would put his costs up".

Even when mine were at school they had one HT who wouldn't approve term time holidays and we went two years without a family holiday, well we had long weekends but not a full week. With our local schools you would have half the kids having "exceptional circumstances" because of how many parents are in hospitality and how can that be exceptional?

BarbarianMum, well there are the forces, medical staff and support staff in hospitals, how about ambulance staff, fire brigade. How would you feel if the sewers were blocked and the water company said you would have to wait a fortnight as all the staff were on holiday. No supermarket as too many staff off. Power cut? 2 weeks without heat or light as everyone off. You can't have all temporary staff running things, it just wouldn't work, employers have to have a certain number in work.

So if the travel firms are to blame, and should be stopped having higher pricing in the holidays, will that rule also apply to all the little bed and breakfasts, campsites, family run farm holidays, chalet parks across the UK too? It's all relative, a bed and breakfast on Blackpool promenade also charges a higher rate in July compared to March.

It would be fine if all schools were consistent with what an unauthorised absence was.

We were invited to a family wedding - mine were the only children at the wedding (none of the other guests had children.) I had 3 schools to ask for permission (and I hate that, I wasn't asking, I was telling them! I'll decide what is best for my children)

2 schools put it down as authorised absence, 1 as unauthorised. Why? And as if I would see that and then leave one of my children to attend school!

We then had a funeral a few months later. I decided I wasn't going to ask for permission to take my kids to their grandparents funeral so I phoned and told them they wouldn't be in and refused to fill a form out.