To wonder how the heck schools expect working parents to cope with this?

[Worriedaboutdog]

Apologies this may be a rant. DS1 is due to start school in September. We have therefore put childcare plans in place based on him starting school on the first day of term in September. School have just announced that:

a) reception start a week later
And
b) as a summer birthday, DS actually will do half days for another week after that, and ‘must be picked up at 1.30pm’.

No mention of either of these things was made when we looked round the school. We have already juggled the time off we have available to look after him over the summer. As it happens it’s probably easier for us than most parents as DH is a shift worker so can cover some days, but we were relying on him going to school at the beginning of September, and being in after-school club on days DH isn’t at home until I can get there to pick him up. Wtf are parents who both work Monday-Friday meant to do about two extra weeks?! This was all announced today in a meeting (I couldn’t go, because it was at 3.30pm, but DH did), and when he asked the class teacher if they had to go home at lunchtime or could stay and then go to after school club, she said they had to go home and we’d have to get ‘a grandparent or someone’ to pick them up. So we’ll just magic up a grandparent physically fit and willing enough to do a whole week of half days childcare, who is actually able to drive to the school, then.

He can possibly go back to his current nursery for the week he isn’t in school at all, but the half days are stumping me. I think I probably am being unreasonable to be cross - I realise school is not designed to be childcare, and therefore not run for the convenience of the parents, BUT they must know that parents make assumptions (based on the information on their website!) about the dates of terms and the length of the school day, and make arrangements accordingly. And that this just isn’t feasible for everyone, and if they don’t bloody tell you about it until June then plans (and budgets) for September childcare are already in place! Argh.

I live in Spain and children go to school from the year they are three (so, if your birthday is in October, November or December you might actually not be 2 at the beginning of term). It's not obligatory, you can keep them out until they are 6, but everyone sends them generally otherwise it is hard to get a place later. They do the first day 11-1 and then the full day of 9 am to 2 pm and those who stay for lunch are there til 4 pm.

Sorry, I mean you might only be 2, nearly three when you start.

One of mine went to a school which had a staggered part-time start in the months June/July for a proper Sept beginning. I just missed it all out! I couldn't work part-time and didn't have help so just started with the full-time hours when that started.

I love the comment on how inset days are 'sprung' on parents, as are sports days etc.

You'll probably find them on the school calendar, which the school publishes in September of each year.

And the newsletters and possibly the website.

As a busy working parent, I find a diary, and a pen very handy to write these days in. Or you could go high tech and use your phone calendar.

Put these dates somewhere safe and make arrangements for inset early. It amazes me how many parents at my kids school kick off about a recent inset day and how they can't get childcare because they "didn't know about it". You have had 10 month's notice. It was on the calendar last September It's not schools fault you can't sort your diary out.

I've missed all the sports days so far. Made the occasional nativity with colleagues being lovely and covering me. My kids haven't suffered too much.

If you can't make parents evening then all decent teachers will have a phone consultation with you. Arrange for this. Some will also do quick meetings before school if staff can.

Being a working parent is hard. But you also need to remember the school is also very likely to be staffed by them.

The school doesn't live in a bubble, they are supposed to be forming a partnership with the parents on the education of their children, and to act in loco parentis while the children are with them.

This. I mean, I don't think teachers would be impressed if parents refused to do the reading records, homework, costume-making, volunteering, attending parents' evenings etc. on the grounds that "Parents aren't teachers--that's not our job."

It's in the schools and parents' interests to work together on the assumption that school and home influence one another. It's easier for parents to find the free time and energy to stimulate their children, read with them, take them on interesting days out if they have not lost all their annual leave and run themselves ragged trying to juggle this kind of situation.

I think for children who are used to full time nursery care, a staggered school start is probably more tiring and disruptive.

Go to school for a little while, then to nursery or child minder or whatever. Repeat for a few weeks.

Better to either have them in school full time from the start, whether that's at the beginning of term or a few weeks in.

Luckily our primary school encourages all children to start full time at the beginning of term - this was for both my now 19 and 9 year old.

When parents criticise schools for the way they do things they often forget that teachers are often parents and actually do have some understanding of these things.

If it’s inconvenient for you, talk to the school and work something out.

This is the norm in our area. My DC school they are on half days for the first 3 weeks.

Pretty standard. The school are doing what works for them and for the new starters, they know what works best. Unfortunately childcare issues can’t be their concern.

It's a moot point though whether schools are doing this because there's some evidence a staggered start benefits children, or whether it's just the norm or whether they just prefer teaching half days for a few weeks as it's easier for them. If some schools don't do it any more, then it suggests that it isn't actually essential or about wellbeing.

YANBU. This happened to us when youngest DD started school and we were given very little notice and as it was a new policy (introduced by a new head of reception who funnily enough did not have children).

I think we actually had to cancel our annual holiday so that we could take annual leave which was particularly unfair on our older DD. The school also told the attached preschool that they couldn't after the children even if they had been going there for a couple of years it would be "too tiring" (the nursery thought that was ridiculous in the case). Apparently:

1. we all have grandparents living nearby who don't work and can look after the children.
2. We all have copious amounts of annual leave.
3. the teacher who brought in the policy couldn't actually care less

I think that most do staggered starts as it has always been done.
Most children go to nursery now and often very long days.
When I started school 40 years ago most kids had been at home with Mum and at the most had gone to school nursery for 3 hours a day.
I think it was needed then.

In my dc case it was a detriment. As I said the settle in period was until the term they were five so Easter in our case.

Not only did they miss much of the foundations in phonics and stuff but also friendships had formed by the time they even started their staggered.

This has been done for a long long time. I don't agree with it in most cases and you are not BU. A child that has previously attended nursery/pre school is well able to cope with full days from the beginning and there is no advantage in the phased starting - except perhaps for the teacher!

I feel most sorry for single parents who have to work and have no childcare.. what one earth are they meant to do? All the inset days are bad enough but this is just the icing on the cake.

Welcome to being the mum of a school child!

Keep in mind that Christmas and midterm breaks will all eat into your annual leave, along with sick days (your kids and your own), dental appointments for all of you, availability to attend school shows, parent's events and numerous other things. ALL my annual leave (24 days) was taken up in the first year and then work complained that it is 'obligatory' to take two weeks consecutively and therefore I didn't have enough annual leave! Added to that, they put me under pressure to work late and my annual leave was limited to taking time 'off' when other team members did not have the same period off.

No grandparents here and in the end our full time nanny was costing so much it just wasn't worth it either financially or emotionally. I left!

This has been done for a long long time. I don't agree with it in most cases and you are not BU. A child that has previously attended nursery/pre school is well able to cope with full days from the beginning and there is no advantage in the phased starting - except perhaps for the teacher!

Yes, I certainly think it was more for the benefit of the teachers than the children. The think that really annoyed me about it (apart from the lack of notice) was that the attached preschool would have been more than happy to take the children who were phasing in (if they had previously gone there) but they were banned from doing this. They strongly disagreed with the policy and seemed quite insulted that the school didn't think it appropriate for them to look after children even if they had been going there for a couple of years and were totally used to it.

To be honest it is quite normal to ease in gradually with half days and they have given you three months notice. Full days are very tiring for them at first.

You'd need to check but I heard before you can get your free 30 hours still. So could you keep him in nursery till he's compulsory school age. The term he is 5 and then start him in the school full time.

Full days are very tiring for them at first.

Not nowadays for most children as they are used to being in childcare.

I love the comment on how inset days are 'sprung' on parents, as are sports days etc....You'll probably find them on the school calendar, which the school publishes in September of each year.

Indeed, but both my son's primary and secondary schools changed the school calendar as each year progressed without any proper announcements. I always print it off the internet during the Summer holiday to stick on the fridge, so I know for a fact that dates were changed as I have the original version. As for sports days, etc., no, never been on the school calendar - just term start/finish and inset days. As with everything relating to schools, there's no standardisation nor consistency - each is different and do things in different ways.

Okay, so it is clear from this thread that schools that insist on this are breaking the law, but a lot of parents are either unaware this is the law or are unwilling to rock the boat (understandable at the beginning of potentially a long relationship with the school). It is also clear both from this thread and from conversations I have had with friends, neighbours, women at clubs DD goes to etc that first time parents are generally not aware of these settling in periods, nor are they aware that there is no guarantee your school will give you a place in wrap around care, if they even offer it.

I am an Economics teacher and I was at a training day on Wednesday. We were discussing the gender pay gap and the lecturer commented that the stats show it is more of a 'motherhood penalty'. I mentioned the problem with getting wrap around care. Most of my colleagues round the table looked at me blankly. I had to explain what wrap around care was. These were teachers and given their ages and remarks some had made, some were dads of primary age children. This will never change while women take on all the mental load and hassle of dealing with it! Nice that the (mostly female) primary teachers also get the blame when they are unlikely to have any input into their school policies.

Also the 'school is not childcare' and 'you should just suck it up' brigade need to bear in mind that this is state education under discussion, paid for by the taxpayer. You know, like the mums (and teachers) that are working and paying tax? At the very least the taxpayer should not be having to deal with public sector managers openly flouting the law.

I have a top tip, however, if your family has two working parents. If the school doesn't offer Saturday open days and/or can't tell you when you visit or phone up what the wraparound is or whether you can access it from day 1 of reception, you should look elsewhere because the school will not be an environment that welcomes working mums.

I’m dreading this. It is already hard juggling 8-6 nursery drop off/collections. No idea how we will manage shorter hours, holidays and staggered starts. I know people trot out the school isn’t childcare thing but if the government want people to work then there has to be an acceptance that school does provide a role in enabling parents to work. The private schools near me all have far better provision for wrap around care than the state schools - there must be an element of recognising in many cases both parents are working to pay fees.

I think half the issue is that schools simply cannot afford to provide the wraparound care private schools can.

If the government want working parents they need to fund the schools properly to provide this.

Schools are mostly skint. Really skint.

When my eldest (now 10) started school they did 2 weeks of half days. Both DH & I worked FT and DS had been in nursery FT since he was 9mths old.
Thankfully DSs nursery agreed to extend and do half days & I argued with school for the morning slot so he went to school in the mornings then I raced across town in my lunchtime to pick him up and drop him at nursery.
It was really disruptive and didn't help in settling him in at all. He only settled once he was there full time.
It might work for some kids who haven't been away from their parents before but there are loads of kids who have been in a nursery environment before so it's not a huge leap and a full school day is still shorter than they are used to.

DH and I were both working in state education when we chose to send DD to a private school and we made that decision because of i) certainty - being able to enter her several years before she was 5 rather than having to scramble about following the spring offer day and ii) the guaranteed wrap around care - as in, it's available to every child, every day, doesn't have to be booked and they get food and drink.

Some jobs just don't have flexibility, however nice the management may be. You have to be there at a certain time or the job can't happen. Teaching is one of course. One of DD's friends has parents who both work in financial services. One drops her off and goes in late; the other goes in very early and picks her up. DH and I can't do that as our students are there needing to be taught at times not chosen by us.

Nice that the (mostly female) primary teachers also get the blame when they are unlikely to have any input into their school policies.*

The policy at DD's school was put in place by the (new) head of foundation stage who was the reception teacher so I think it fair enough to blame the teacher. She was female but didn't have children.