unauthorised absence?

[jen333]

Just one day!! - last day of term, to enable us to take holiday (flights Fridays only) in school half term. Did the honest thing and made official application. Just received letter to say that it is unauthorised. One other day requested two years ago - my dd has excellent attendance otherwise. Has the world gone mad??

The fixed penalty is for failing to ensure a child attends school regularly, contrary to section 444 of the Education Act 1996. Missing the odd day does not count as failing to attend school regularly, so if I received a fixed penalty for a few days' holiday, I wouldn't pay it. If the LEA are not intending to prosecute, they have to withdraw the fixed penalty notice if it has not been paid at the end of the period for payment.

There is no question of the LEA not providing this service; only the LEA can prosecute in default of payment of the £50 fine, not a contracted-out company.

Oh, and attendance does not effect grades, it affects them.

As stated in indigos thread - penalty notices are issued if a child does not attend regularly. A day off is not going to get you a penalty notice.

A penalty notice is the result of a process monitoring a childs attendance and this process can be triggered anytime you child has under a set attendance % (this can vary from school to school) usually once the attendance is 85% or below. However once the penalty notice process has begun, if the student does not have anymore days off for any reason (only proven medical reasons are allowed) then a penalty notice cannot be issued.

For instance you child had a cold in September, the vomiting bug for 3 days in October and then a cold again for 3 days in November (all genuine reasons) it is more than likely that when the school reviews the attendace for the Autumn term your child would have less than 85% overall for the first 3 months of school. A letter beginning the penalty notice process would be issued but as long as your child had no more days off then the process is stopped.

If your child is ill during the penalty notice process it is advisable to send them to school and have the school send them home or ensure you have taken them to the doctors and take the copy of the perscription or proof they have been to the doctors like an appointment card into school.

It is nonsense that a penalty notice can be issued like a spot parking fine.

I agree that it is nonsense, but it's the reality in my DC's school.
I really object to getting double the fine if both parents are together.
Fines have been issued to families who have taken a day of unauthorised absence.

Whilst under the penalty notice process it does only take one day of unauthorised absence for the decision for a penalty notice to be issued. But parents are notified in advance that the process has begun.

Both parents have an individual legal responsibility to ensure their child attends school - both parents can be fined if the child continues to not attend school regularly and this applies to parents who do not live together too.

Also unless the child has repeated poor attendance then the penalty notice process would not even begin. As I said earlier if the child has no more absence under the process then no further action is taken.

Another point to mention is that if the process began say in July then the attendance of the child will continue to be monitored (usually weekly) the following Septemeber.

A friend took her 2 DC's out for two days (not condoning it at all, but one had had 100% attendance up until then, the other had missed two days with a sickness bug the term before.
She got a £200 fine. Instantly.
She is appealing, but has paid the fine in the meantime as it doubles if not paid within 28 days.
I think that just encourages people to lie, and to get their children to lie.

Tell them you will take it as a snow day.

When teachers can't/won't come to school because of snow that seems to be ok.

iamme43,

Why do you see closing a school because the adults who you entrust your children to cannot get there safely as such a bad thing?

'But I get to my place of work', you will say - yes, but do you have to get there by a specific time (8.30 am) or can you go a little slower / get there a little later, or can you work from home. Schools can't, because there must be a safe number of adults to supervise the children as soon as schools open.

'Manage with fewer staff' - well, at the school I teach in, 2 staff, both TAs who work 1 to 1 with specific children, live close to the school. The rest of us commute between 8 and 25 miles as it is very rural. Do you feel that it would be safe for a school of 100 children to open with these 2 members of staff running it, especially as over 30 of out children have SEN, some with needs that require 1 to 1 attention with things like toileting?

'Can't other teachers who live locally just go to their nearest school?' - well, we don't have any of those, what are we expected to do?

'Just open later' - well, we could, and on the 2nd day after snowfall this is often our preferred option. However i am sure that you would still complain as you would prefer to leave at the normal time to give yourself enough time to drive to work slowly and arrive only a bit late..

'Get there anyway' - hmm. The funerals of my contemporaries I have been to include 3 as a result of driving when there were specific weather warnings in place. And if I am badly injured and cannot work for months then that is much more of a disruption to your child's education than a single snow day to keep me safe.

'It didn't happen in my day' - it did, but was rarer because it was more common for teachers to live close to where they taught, in the same way that it was common for everyone to live close to their place of work. Today's long commutes to all types of work are a relatively modern phenomenon.

To the OP, I think the response is entirely reasonable.

• The head cannot authorise it, because it is a day of holiday in term time and it is quite reasonable to send a message to everyone that full attendance at school is something that the school values.

• However, there will be no consequences of this single unauthorised day, which again is reasonable because it shows that it is persistent or frequent absence that causes the greatest harm.

In my LEA, no absence is authorised unless medical - and for children whose attendace becomes of concern, that medical reason has to be supported with a note from the doctor. Again, i think that is reasonable - the schools send a consistent message that attendance is expected and valued, while parents understand that they have to weigh up whatever they wish to be absent for against the fact that it will always be unauthorised. Children are still absent for a couple of days here and there, and parents do not get into trouble for that. However nobody now views it as 'their right' to take 10 days of leave in term time as well as all school holidays - and that is good.

I do not see the teacher not coming to work as a bad thing if it it dangerous. I was just setting an example that missing the odd day off school is not the end of the world.............

I had to ask for 5 days of authorised absence last Feb because I booked a half term holiday (genuinely by accident) the week before half term . It was highly embarrassing to admit it to the Head but she gave permission. DD was in year 2 as well which wasn't good. There a lot of children in our school from South America etc and they often go on extended trips home which is allowed so I suppose that was fair enough.

In this case, as others have said, I wouldn't worry.

iam43,

But in that case, everyone misses the day - and the teacher re-plans to cover the same material on another day. A child with persistent absence whe the rest of the class is present, misses what is taught.

This is only 1 day - and so as I have said, it is right that the school doesn't authorise it but also right that the parent should judge that in this case they will take it anyway. There will be no consequences as long as it is not a consistent pattern. There will be consequences if it is a consistent pattern. that seems reasonable to me.

Apologies for reacting to your post in the way I did - we were very badly verbally abused by parents when we closed the school for a snow day last year, despite the act that none of the parents drove to work that day whereas all the teachers drive to school.

No worries teacher.

Sometimes the way a conversation would go if you were sat beside me is totally unlike a conversation you read on here......

I think the school should have ''sun days'' as well as we get so few of them would be nice to spend an odd day on the beach [authorised ]

And if teachers go on strike for one day, despite the fact they will actually do the work and cover the learning planned for that day anyway, all hell breaks loose....

I am still hoping for a snow day on Monday :)

So am I right is assuming that no sanctions could be taken in this situation? My ds had a week off in year 1. It was for a specia extended family holiday. I was told that a penalty warning notice could be issued. Not heard anything though. Now need to take ds out for one day. Now year 4. Could I be fined?

You could be fined - but you are very unlikely to be.

I don't see how it is legal to fine people though. I can see how it is annoying for the school, and not ideal if it is being used regularly for neglectful reasons, but if HE is allowed, why is school attendance suddenly legally enforceable in some cases?

I'm following this intently as I keep seeing exciting educational things that I want to take DD to, but she is stuck in school reciting her alphabet and getting stressed out :( I'm pretty sure I will be requesting some form of flexischool, but doubt it will be granted. Can I not even take her out for the odd day, for something that will help her education? Even though she does more educational stuff (actual stuff like writing, reading, adding up, doing science experiments and historical projects, and not even counting the usual life skills stuff) on the average weekend anyway?

Like I say, it would be annoying for the school, and they are lovely so I don't want to annoy them, but I have no idea why it would be illegal to use your parental responsibility and right to educate your child outside of the school for the odd day.

Madness.

Basically, the 1996 law says that a child who goes to school at all must attend regularly (the word 'regularly' has I think become defined through case law as 'every day the school is open unless leave is authorised', and LEAs have become much tighter recently as to what can be 'authorised'), but a child may be withdrawn from school completely to be home educated.

There is a get-out clause for flexi-schooling in that a school may allow a child to be absent 'with leave' to effectively be educated off-site BUT that is at the school's discretion not the parent's.

I've never heard of legal sanctions being applied for one day, but do sometimes wonder why people can't understand the school's position on what they want.

If your child misses a day at school, even for an educational reason which is great for them, this has knock-on effects for other children in the class. Providing covering work takes time. Since lessons never progress exactly as plan, so does helping the child catch up even if a plan was agreed. All this means less time spent with those children whose parents did stick to the published school days in planning their educationally enriching experiences.

And are you really suggesting that a head should evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether this or that alternative is educational or necessary and this one not, beyond some fairly basic rules (funerals etc.). Can you imagine the school playground discussions about why this child has been authorised, this one not?

Flexischooling, though, is different. That's not necessarily an absence issue as such, but a way of mixing education providers. Can see why heads object, but am not sure the law is as clear.

I know it's annoying for the school, so I doubt I would actually do it. From a legal point of view though, it just seems odd.

The legal position (and being both a teacher and an ex-home educator I have stood on both sides of this) seems quite clear to me.

Every parent has a choice of two paths - they can choose

1. To send their child to school.
2. To home educate their child.

Once that choice is made, it is not legal to 'hop between' the two options on a daily basis (ie to say that a day off is 'home education', or for a home educator to take a child into school for a day and demand that they be educated there) though the choice can be reviewed on a regular basis.

It seems to me to be obvious that if a parent chooses the 'school' option, there should not be a legal loophole to allow parents to maliciously keep their children away from school by saying 'they were being home educated that day'.

You are obviously a concerned parent who wants their child to have the best eduaction. Unfortunately, not all parents are like that and the law has to take that into account.

I'm wanting to take my kids to a sporting event (Olympic trials) and we can only get tickets in the week now. It will be interesting to see what happens. With the Olympics happening in our country I think this will be a great opportunity for the kids to learn more about sport, competition and the Olympics. I'm curious to see what the school thinks and the LEA.

It's like - to take an absurd example of another legal position where a choice is made and has particular consequences - being married or choosing to live together as an unmarried couple.

A couple makes a choice at a particular point, and this is recognised by the law. You cannot then be 'unmarried' for a day or a week because that would confer some particular tax break or something, nor can you decide to 'be married' for a few days to take advantage of a particular opportunity. However, if you are married, you could decide to divorce, or if you are unmarried you could decide to get married - you just can't 'flip' between the two on a daily or weekly basis ...