Term time holidays - minister orders schools to continue to fine parents

[KateMumsnet]

Hello all

More news on the fraught question of term-time holidays.

You might remember that a recent high court ruling overturned a fine imposed on a parent who'd taken their child out of school for a family holiday. Today, however, schools minister Nick Gibb has ordered headteachers to continue to fine families whose children are absent without permission during term time.

Do let us know what you think - and if you're completely confuzzled and bewildered, we've got more information on what's what over here.

But schools are not authorising absence for special circumstances (I know of a child who was turned down for authorised absence to travel to say goodbye to her dying granddmother). HTs are not being allowed to use their discretion - and are not using their discretion.

HTs used to have discretion of up to 10 days. But in September 2013 Mr Gove and the Tory government decided to crack down on this and said that head teachers could not grant any leave of absence to pupils during term time without "exceptional circumstances".

And I speak as someone who did have a single day's absence on the last day of term turned down for authorisation.

I still don't agree with fines or that they particularly work in keeping the children most in need at school. I don't disagree with the statistical data. There are lots of things that numbers on paper don't show.

Somethings are hard to qualify numerically. How do you quantify the enrichment of a childhood experience? How can you show that a holiday opened a childs eyes to the world, to different cultures to a desire to see and learn more. It can turn on a light that includes a desire to achieve and knuckle down and cease learning opportunities.

We know as adults you can slave away at a problem for days and not progress then have a wonderful night out with friends, weekend away, proper mental break and return to work and the solution to the problem seams obvious. That mental break is needed by children as well.

"Whatever your head tells you the truth is that they have discretion"

prh47bridge that is just not true since 2013. They only have discretion for "exceptional circumstances." The government has explicitly said that holidays do not come under the exceptional circumstances banner - regardless of the family's circumstances. They specifically removed the word "holidays" from the regulations in 2013.

Even if it's a wedding, major family event etc, authorisation cannot be given if it could have reasonably been scheduled for holiday times.

The National Assoc of HT's has issued guidance that only absence for the bereavement of a close family member, a funeral or important religious observance could be counted as exceptional.

I think it's fair for school in impose fine for some parents, who don't care about their kids education, take them out 3 weeks on term time in one-go, simply reason 'I want to have a holiday'! That's really not acceptable!

I don't think even that is the problem kitty. I think it's the parents who persistently don't bother to get their kids to school on a very regular basis that are the problem

are not being allowed to use their discretion - and are not using their discretion

It may be that head teachers are not using their discretion but they are being allowed to use it. The legislation and the guidance from the government is clear - the head teacher has discretion and can use it.

prh47bridge that is just not true since 2013

It is true but there is wide misunderstanding of the effect of the changes.

Prior to 2013 head teachers could authorise up to 10 days holiday per year in "special circumstances" with additional leave of absence for holidays in "exceptional circumstances". Neither term is defined in the legislation. Many parents took this as meaning they had the right to take their children out of school for up to 10 days a year. This belief was so widespread that most head teachers felt unable to resist holiday requests, although some did and some parents were fined.

The change in 2013 removed the reference to 10 days but allows the head to grant leave of absence in "exceptional circumstances". The legislation still does not define that term leaving it up to head teachers to decide. Many have chosen to deny all requests and claim they have no discretion. But the legislation is clear. They do have discretion and, if they consider the circumstances to be exceptional, they can grant leave of absence.

I am not aware of the government saying that holidays are never "exceptional circumstances". The official guidance states that "leave is unlikely... to be granted for the purposes of a family holiday as a norm". That falls significantly short of saying that it will never be granted for a family holiday. It simply says that it will not be the norm.

The NAHT guidance is not quite as you say. It includes the examples you give but specifically says they are illustrative, not exhaustive. So they do NOT say that these are the only situations that can be counted as exceptional. They do say that absence would not normally be authorised for events that could reasonably be scheduled outside term time. They do say that holidays are not considered an exceptional circumstance but this is based on the fact that, for most families, holidays do not have to be in term time. I would argue that this part of the NAHT guidance overlooks the fact that, for a few parents, their employer will not permit holidays during school holidays. I should note that the NAHT guidance has not statutory authority and is not binding on head teachers.

So far this year my Dd (year 7) has missed school

2 days sickness

3 full day rehearsal for Christmas concert

2 half days rehearsal Christmas concert

1 day being a 'runner' for the support staff taking messages around school.

4 days for rehearsals for the concert opening a new building at school

3 half days for the opening concert

1 day for choir competition

2 days due to a building flooding so they closed to year 7 and 8.

The rehearsal time was not told to anyone before hand. Only once they had committed to doing the concerts. She left the choir because they also expected students to stay until 6pm on rehearsal days, meaning she was knackered and had to miss her hobbies.

13 days of missed lessons. Yes, participating is important.....but 13 days. A full day to run messages about?

13 days is more than if I took her out of school for two weeks.

Had she have stayed in the choir there would have been far more days missed.

If every day of learning is so important and can not be got back, Why do they take kids out of classes so often?

Especially to run messages around school for support staff. I told the school she wasn't to do this again. We were given no prior notice before. Her HoY asked her that morning to do it, she agreed. So would I, if I was her. A full day with no lessons wondering around the school with her best friend

13 not including the 2 days sickness. The school take her out of lessons far more often than I do.

How many of these children who are off school for 'months at a time' have SEN/SN or mental health difficulties? De-registering children is a terrible idea.

The legislation and the guidance from the government is clear - the head teacher has discretion and can use it.

But not for holidays.

I am not aware of the government saying that holidays are never "exceptional circumstances".

They specifically changed the wording of the guidance on 2013 to remove the word "holidays" which is exactly where this whole debate has come from

This is bullying of a parent who has stood up against his local authority and won twice now. There is no case to answer. This is not such a serious issue that it should end up in the supreme court. Disgusting state bullying at our expense.

Disgusting state bullying - I agree.

I have an acquaintance who was fined for her child who has autism being absent. Totally unsympathetic Headteacher and LA. I bloody despair.

In the end the child was found a place at a special school. But the fine still stood.

Just to add to the fun they have let academies and free schools set their own term dates. Next year the only time my dc's holidays co-incide are for Christmas and Summer. 20 weeks off between them but can't do anything together such as days out etc due to school runs. Mad for going on holiday, childcare etc. They can't have it all.

I know the appeal is specifically about Jon Platt's case, but I hope the furore can raise awareness that parents of children with special needs ARE being fined for absences relating to those special needs.

This disablist bullying is actually happening.

I think everyone on the thread can agree that the system as it stands now is a farce not working - either in terms of tackling persistent truancy / parental apathy, or in terms of allowing reasonable flexibility to families with genuine need to be absent in term time.

It's the worst of both worlds

I think the fines are ridiculous, and also a sad reflection of the damagingly narrow definition of education in our society. Child wellbeing and mental health are in an increasingly dire state and, amongst other factors, there are good reasons to link this to pressured school environments in which narrowly-defined academic achievement is prioritised at the expense of other elements of development. Restricting the freedom of parents to prioritise general wellbeing, by going on the odd holiday with their children, is consistent with many of the unhealthy patterns we've developed in educational culture.

I also think it is very stupid of the government to pursue this, and it will lead to an ongoing backlash in society. I suspect this backlash will be especially concentrated among highly educated and conscientious parents. This is not a good situation for the government to get into.

But not for holidays

Yes, for holidays.

The head teacher has discretion to grant leave of absence for any purpose in exceptional circumstances. That includes holidays. There is nothing in the legislation to prevent a head teacher granting leave of absence for a holiday and the government's guidance on the subject clearly envisages leave of absence for holidays in some circumstances. The removal of the reference to holidays from the relevant legislation did not take away the ability of the head teacher to grant leave of absence for holidays. All it did was remove the slightly lower bar for approval of up to 10 days holiday per year. It did not ban holidays completely. If a complete ban was intended a specific provision stating that leave of absence could not be granted for term time holidays would have been needed. There is no such wording in the legislation.

I think everyone on the thread can agree that the system as it stands now is not working

No, I cannot agree with that. It very clearly is working in terms of reducing persistent truancy and absenteeism generally. The absence statistics are clear. Both absence and persistent absence are down since the change to the regulations.

I would, however, agree that at least some (many?) heads are being over zealous in refusing to authorise absence.

This is bullying of a parent who has stood up against his local authority and won twice now

Appealing against a judgement in the courts is not bullying. The government believes the courts have misinterpreted the legislation. That is a perfectly valid reason to appeal. This isn't going to the Supreme Court yet but it could and probably should. That is the correct forum for determining a dispute over the interpretation of legislation. The Supreme Court's judgement is binding on the lower courts. The existing judgement is only binding on magistrates, although it must be considered in any cases that reach the High Court.

Oh come on. Really? A parents holiday decision should end up in the supreme court? (Who pays his legal fees btw? Is it state funded at supreme court level?). Govt could always, you know, legislate to remove doubt.
State bullying.

The head teacher has discretion to grant leave of absence for any purpose in exceptional circumstances. That includes holidays.

But they aren't

Sorry, posted too soon.

They aren't because the government is down on them like a ton of bricks (as shown by this farce of a court case) and because they are following the NAHT guidance in the absence

What happens to the schools that have children working on the West end or in the entertainment industry that have below 70% attendance who still go on to get all their gcses. Doesn't that suggest that the teaching is the problem not holidays

What would happen if a huge number of parents all took their children out of school for a specific day and all refused to pay the fines? Would they all go to court? Anyone up for it?

They aren't because the government is down on them like a ton of bricks (as shown by this farce of a court case) and because they are following the NAHT guidance in the absence

No, the government is not down on any head teacher like a ton of bricks. Ofsted will look at overall absence statistics but they will not look at individual decisions to grant leave. The government will not get involved at all. Provided a school's overall absence statistics are good there are no consequences for a head teacher who grants leave of absence for a holiday. Neither Ofsted nor the government cares whether an individual head teacher follows NAHT guidance. That guidance has no official standing.

This court case is between a parent and an LA. The government has asked the council to appeal the High Court decision and is funding the council's costs. The council could have refused but has chosen to appeal.

Who pays his legal fees btw

Platt, the parent in this case, is being crowdfunded. If the government wins because Platt runs out of money that won't give a definitive ruling on the legislation - they will have won by default. The government may therefore agree to meet his costs through the higher courts in order to get a definitive ruling but they don't have to do so.