Another one about school fines

[schoolgatepolitics1]

I really need some advice as so many confusing threads on this topic. Single parent, took my child out for one day; first day off in 4 years. Didn’t tell school but wrote in on day off to say they will be absent. Have near perfect attendance record. Other families have take notice mulitiple days off and not being fined. Council says they don’t make the decisions who to fine, head teacher does and submits names to them. Guess my question is has this happened to anyone else and why is the school submitting some names to council and not others despite all their absences being unauthorized. Totally prepared to pay the fine but just don’t understand what seems like discriminatory application of the policy.

Our Head decides whether to refer to the LEA
We fill in a request form ( which is mostly sent back with a tick in the unauthorised box) but the box saying that the LEA will be informed has never been ticked in our case
I do know parents who have been fined though but I have no idea how The Head decides whether to refer it or not

It is how that decision is made who to report to LEA that am challenging. I need to know the basis and also because according to the LEA, that is not a decision for the head teacher. All unauthorized absences are to be reported.

In my authority. all unauthorised absences, indeed ALL absences are reported to the LA. It is done automatically via a computerised register system. I can't think any other authority would be much different. So the authority knows at a general and specific level the attendance figures across the county.

Yes, all attendance figures are submitted to the LA/DfE, but that's at a whole school level - the LA doesn't look at individual children's attendance unless the school refers the parents for a fine or asks the attendance service to get involved to provide support. That's how it works here, anyway.

Like Spanieleyes all absences are reported automatically via an electronic system. Periodically the EWO arrives in school with a computer printout of concerns which are discussed with the deputy head (in my school) and the parents. The decision to proceed with a fine is a joint one.

And they wonder why people call their kids in sick!

The introduction of fines has not resulted in an increase in children being called in sick. However, the vast majority of LAs will not fine parents for a single day's absence if attendance is otherwise good. If, as it seems, the OP's LA does I think they should change their policy. And if the school is applying fines inconsistently that is wrong and could result in a legal challenge.

What year group is (was) your child in?
I certainly know of examples here of parents of DC in SATs years (Y2 and Y6) being fined where DC in other years were not (for example a family with a child in Y4 and another in Y6 taking them out for the same days, would be fined for the Y6 child but not the other ...)

OP I would check the web site for the local authority responsible for your child's school under Education penalty notices or School attendance fines

Thanks again for taking the time to reply. Child was in year 3. The council websites states
“Taking holidays in school time is not acceptable. Parents may ask for leave of absence for exceptional circumstances only and should expect a fixed-penalty notice for each child if they do not have their head teacher’s permission.”
To me this means as confirmed by the EWT manager at the council, all unauthorized absences will be fined. As I mentioned above I will pay the fine but am challenging the school’s basis for presenting some parents to be fined and not others. If the reason given is not satisfactory, I will take it to the board of governors and if not resolved I will take it to the Department of Education. I know am not as chummy with the school staff as some parents are and I have not allowed my child to go on one trip but those would not be good enough reasons to put me forward to be fined, would it?

I unfortunately am involved with attendance. I work at a primary school.

HT is not allowed to authorise absence unless it meets exceptional circumstances criteria.
He does not choose to fine all families that take term time holidays and there are many reasons as to why not.
1 family were not fined due to child having major surgery and family needed a break.
1 family due to suffering a traumatic bereavement.
2 families for just having a really shit time and needing a nice break together (children with SN that are violent in the home).
Travellers don't get fined.

He never fines for less than 5 days absence.

Have you actually received a fine?

You state that you didn't inform the school in advance, but wrote in on the day off to say that your DC would be absent. Does this mean that you emailed the school on the day of absence, or sent a letter by post, which would have arrived after the day of absence? Whichever it is, I would say that is probably the reason that you have been reported as basically your child just didn't show up on a day that they were expected in school.

If you ever need a day off in future, either inform the school in advance, or call your child in sick.

Yes i have received the fine. The only reason I didn’t put in a request is just because it clearly states “for exceptional circumstances” and since I didn’t have an exceptional circumstance I thought it would be cheeky to fill in the form. I emailed morning of like I would if it was sickness. I was asked why and I told the truth and I got mail back saying “your circumstance is not exceptional and you will be fined”. One of the other parents I mentioned was not fined, went for a wedding. She filled form in and was told it was not exceptional and unauthorized. She went anyway for 3 days and not fined. A poster above mentioned a box is ticked in her school whether LEA will be informed or not. This I believe is the issue, according to LEA, informing or not informing is not a prerogative of the head teacher. She is obligated to report all unauthorized absences; she can't pick and choose.

The HT do report all unauthorised absences but not all unauthorised absences lead to a fine.
It is the HT prerogative as to whether they want the parent to be fined for the unauthorised absence.

Just to add that if an absence is authorised then there will be evidence as to why it had been authorised e.g medical appointment, holiday in term time due to shift patterns etc. The HT is accountable for the absences that are authorised.

I thought it was a national rule for all LEAs (in England at least), that you could only be fined if you had 10 or more unauthorised absences (ie 5 days or more).

We got fined for one child, but not the other, after a term time holiday. School is separate Infant and junior, with 2 headteachers, but is a Federation and should be consistent across them both. It was younger DC, who had higher overall attendance, that we got fined for, nothing for older DC.

We were out for 5 days (10 sessions) so absolutely no grounds for appeal, the fine was applied correctly, according to their procedures, even if I don't agree with the policy.

I can only assume the lack of the second fine was at that headteacher's discretion or a technical slip up. I can't argue the inconsistency, as I'd be arguing for another fine, but it does seem incredibly unfair that different rules seem to apply sometimes.

It should be a consistent policy throughout the school, ideally throughout the Lea. I'd prefer it to be a consistent policy across the country.

Our school has a policy of fines on day 5 of an absence. There are some exceptions of when it may be for less but this is done in certain circumstances and after the parents have been advised of it.

Oh and since the rules came in re fines we've seen unauthorised absences increased. Families appear to just use the fine as part of the cost of a holiday.

It is true that unauthorised absences have increased but overall absence has come down, which rather undermines your point. The increase is mainly due to absence that was previously authorised no longer being authorised.

The proportion of pupils who are persistent absentees (the main target of the policy) has almost halved. Note also that a lot of the increase in unauthorised absence came during the Isle of Wight court case where the courts initially ruled in favour of the parent. Now that the Supreme Court has reversed that ruling we may see unauthorised absence fall back again.

Having said that, I am sure you are right that some families use the fine as part of the cost of a holiday and ignore the evidence that term time holidays harm their child's education.

If I recall correctly The recent case which tested the enforceability of fines set good attendance at 95% and I would appeal it on this basis.

The case did no such thing.

The Supreme Court ruled that fines can be issued if the child fails to attend "in accordance with the rules prescribed by the school". It is true that the fine in question was issued because the child's attendance was below 95% but the Supreme Court did not set that as a benchmark. The Supreme Court was clear that parents can be fined for any unauthorised absence, even if it was the child's only absence. There is, in any event, no appeal against a fine. The nearest you can get is refusing to pay and allowing the LA to take you to court where you can argue your case.

In practice most will only fine if there are a number of unauthorised absences. This LA (which I have been able to identify) is the only one I have come across that fines for a single absence. Whilst the law allows each LA to take its own approach (and this LA's approach appears to have been driven by head teachers), I think this LA should follow the practice of other LAs and only fine for a longer absence or a pattern of absences.

Interestingly we’ve found (I’m a governor) that parents are now using this 95% as guidance as to how much “free” time they can have off. Neither us or the local authority will commit the money to test this so we’re going along with it. Admittedly only one school, but I wonder how common it is

As I say, the case did not establish 95% as any kind of benchmark. To think that it did is to thoroughly misunderstand the judgement. There is no need to test it. The law is clear. The Supreme Court judgement is binding on the lower courts. If the LA issues fixed penalty notices the courts will uphold them. If the child's attendance is not "in accordance with the rules prescribed by the school" (the words used by the Supreme Court) a fine can be levied.

It is true that many LAs won't fine unless the child misses 5 days in a term or 10 days in a year but that is their choice. As far as the courts are concerned any unauthorised absence can lead to a fine.

Just to pick up on what a pp said about travellers not being fined, in our LA travellers have different rules because when they travel for work they are sometimes too far away to bring their children to school.

If attendance dips below 200 sessions in a calendar year, they can be referred to education welfare. We have a high number of traveller children in our school and in five years only one has dipped below 200 sessions.