To think a 3:20 finish is absurd?

[Itsr]

It’s mostly mums at the school gates. Because the 3:20 finish worked well at a time when most women stayed at home.

now most women work, which means two parents working, why does school finish ar 3:20?! Yes I know there are after school classes etc but some don’t go on for too long and they also cost.

what actually is the reason why the school day isn’t aligned with a work day (like it is with most private schools!)

I bet you’re please you posted OP! I can get what you are saying, my two are adults now and I managed to find a part time job during the school day. However, we have recently returned from Madeira, the school day there for juniors is much longer to allow for both parents to work full time.

When you are a parent, you have to compromise and make adjustments. If it's your choice to have your children in school for the length of a traditional working day, then you will probably have to pay for the extra hours. Expecting state school teachers to add to their workload seems unreasonable to me.

But you said you can afford private...so what's the issue?

Wrap around care is still cheaper than nursery.
We were made up when both of ours were in primary and we were only paying before and after school.
High school comes quicker than you realise too, so again, happy days.

Then the mortgage went up, which swallowed up any gains.

Teachers aren't babysitters. It's education, not childcare.

The problem with providing wrap around care is finding the staff to do it. Very few people want a poorly paid job with split hours (7.30am-8.45am, then 3.20pm-6pm) and schools can't generally afford to employ the wrap around staff between times.

Private school here does 8-6 within the fees (actual school day is 8.30 to 4.30). Breakfast club open from 7.30 for an extra charge, but everything else is included. I couldn't manage with 9-3.15 the primary school operates on.

Posters saying "school isn't childcare" are most likely those who a) have one parent not working, or b) good wrap around. The latter is very hard to find in rural communities. Most of the primaries around us don't even have after school clubs and childminders all have long waiting lists.

The result is in almost all cases, it's the mother sacrificing her job, career and life outside the home just to be at the school gates at 3.15.

Private schools don't align with the working day during their long holidays. And they cost. Just like after school provision costs. Which is part of having children to care for. Why do you assume things should work around your needs?

I didn't, @throwaway25 . I was the higher earner, so my DH dropped to pt hours. We had no family to do any childcare so we paid a child minder.

I'm a primary school teacher. The kids always do their best learning in the morning. By the afternoon they've had enough. Also if teachers had to plan and mark etc for another 2 hours we'd be working til midnight 😂. We can barely cope with the work load as it is. 😭 This is why after school clubs etc exist.

That's great, but you must know from the ratio of mums to dads at any school gate that you're in the minority.

Private schools finish about 4pm? There may be clubs etc but the school day is over by 4.

Yes, I understand that, but my point is that the couple need to come to that decision and compromise has to be involved.
I suspect of course, that not only is the man the higher earner, but in some relationships eg the OP, the onus is on the woman to take responsibility.

I was at school in the 60s/70s. School day ended at 3.45. Bit longer than now but not that much.

Is it?

Yes, I don't think that any school has had the same hours as a traditional workplace.

The problem is that the economy we live in now actually really needs both parents to work. The school day is so badly set up that compromise nearly always has to be made between parents, and the mother is in the majority of cases the one that ends up losing out long term. When the kids are grown and gone, or even when they're out of primary and more self sufficient, it's her who has an employment gap and reduced prospects. I don't know what the solution is, because clearly teachers already work extremely hard, but I don't really know why we've accepted the "school isn't childcare" line while being expected to earn a dual income.

The school day hasn't been "badly set up".
The hours seem quite logical to me.
The issue is that parents have to compromise when they have children, you have to make decisions, and take financial hits. You can't expect to have children and nothing change.

Either the individual parent pays for the additional hours required to suit their workplace, or the state pays for longer days for every child.
I suspect many people want the third option of "schools just stay open longer and no one gets paid any extra for this" which simply won't happen.

Having children isn't a luxury - we need to have children for them to grow up and support our ever expanding ageing population. When the economy operates as ours does with high house prices, high borrowing costs and high cost of living, most people need to have both parents working to support themselves without resorting the state support. Compromise usually means reducing the household income and many can't actually afford to do that. It's not completely outrageous to suggest that an overhaul of the school day might be in order. More working parents = more tax for the treasury and fewer people on state support because they literally can't work because of the timings of the school day!

i don’t think it helps here talking about school as school covers 4 to 18!

Secondary Sxhool is defintely education and not childcare and is moot for this subject anyway as the majority get themselves there and back and based on a thread most mumsnetters feel fine with coming back to an empty house.

junior school is also I think education but trickier - longer days are hard on pupils but wraparound care is fine

infant school - debatable here I think our system neither falls under childcare or education and it is hard to know what this age. Child based I would say the systems of half day education or starting later at 6 works for the child. But that doesn’t work for parents. Certainly forcing children into long days from 4 is far too much but keeping them at home causes issues

so we have what we have a hybrid that compromises both and suits neither

but the key is school ISNT childcare, school is for the child. The problem is wraparound care and the price that is means it isn’t as available as it should be

Agree, but I'd add that it isn't just price that means there are issues with availability of wraparound. It's also that the jobs aren't very attractive in themselves. Split shifts without a full time wage, no flexibility on time or location, limited to school holidays for travel. People tend not to like this when they have other options. They'd have to pay a fair bit more to get past this.

This is the wrong question. We should be asking why many jobs cannot be modelled so that the core hours are 9-3pm, and people are paid extra for commitment outside those hours.

I suspect you're right!

They charge.

Which means they can afford to heat the school buildings. It also means they can employ people to run after school activities.

Obviously we did not have this problem when children worked from about age 5.

I don't understand why so many parents are suprised about things that have not changed sine they were small.