robinsonsgrin
Well-known member
yeh, and who would spend ages sorting out all the homework for them to take - to which they may or may not do..... each and every time someone decides to have a holiday....
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Has the High Court abolished school term time?
- Thread starter Honky Tonx
- Start date
yeh, and who would spend ages sorting out all the homework for them to take - to which they may or may not do..... each and every time someone decides to have a holiday....
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
The problem I have with a fixed penalty is that it doesn't take into account the alleged offender's means; people taking kids out of school to get a cheaper holiday are more likely to suffer hardship from having to find £60 (and as they don't offer weekly payments like courts do, they are more likely to find the penalty doubled when they cannot pay). It is more punitive to the poor who may therefore be unable to afford a holiday at all during normal school closures than it is to better off parents.
Whilst I completely agree with you the fine of £60 is far less than the savings on the holiday so I wouldn't hesitate to do it anyway.
GT49er
Well-known member
Agree, except that I would go one step further, and say that the problem I have with a fixed penalty is the fact that there is a penalty at all!
Jimmy Come Lately
Registered Loser
This. Used to be you could book to avoid the school holidays and have a reasonable expectation of some peace and quiet. Not at all looking forward to next year's invasion of noisy, spoilt brats.
Far greater problems with teaching and education than this. Tories out.
Disney World suggests they might be?
This is the real reason. I have no issue with them stopping parents (by fines or otherwise) whose kids are perpetual truants from taking said kids out of school even more for holidays. However children are different with different needs, families are different and circumstances vary. Introducing a blanket ban with no exceptions and no acknowledgement of needs and circumstances is of course nothing to do with Education (as I've demonstrated) and everything to do with the State's desire to control every aspect of our lives - and also sadly with the British love of petty rules and regulations.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
You obviously know nothing about that kind of bug. The child is infectious for at least 2 days. I've worked in schools for many years and I've seen the effect of the child who was sick the previous day or for that matter, that morning, but 'is okay now'.
Watch how this unfolds. Parents want their children to go to good or outstanding schools - if a schools attendance drops below 95% then this won't happen and parents will blame the school when it is their fault. I can't fathom why a court would feel under 95% is okay for that reason.
This man will be celebrated by some who don't understand unintended consequences. When the law is changed it is not going to make it easier to take holiday is it?
This will be a victory as hollow as winning 1-0 vs Wednesday.
This man will be celebrated by some who don't understand unintended consequences. When the law is changed it is not going to make it easier to take holiday is it?
This will be a victory as hollow as winning 1-0 vs Wednesday.
Because the government says anything over 90% is acceptable .... the court has just followed the governments own policy.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Wow. I wonder how I managed to have two children, and three grandchildren without knowing about bugs and childhood diseases.
Government policy? This government can't decide what a school is so they'd be the last people I'd go to.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
In the war there was such a shortage of teachers, that children only went to school part time. Some in the morning and some in the afternoon.
This 'uneducated generation' managed to rebuild this country despite their lack of school time.
Where? It says "regularly" in the regulations doesn't it? 95-96 is ofsted.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
Yes. It seems you just got lucky or perhaps you didn't care that your kids were spreading highly infectious bugs around. Each to their own I suppose.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Thank you for insinuating that I didn't care about my kids.
Read my post again and see where I said children can be sick in the morning and then be fine in the afternoon. That doesn't mean they have a highly infectious disease. Or are you medically qualified too?
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
I didn't mean you didn't care about your kids. I meant you didn't care about others. I think that was a bit harsh and I apologise.
However, medical training or not, I reiterate, children are often sent into school when they have been sick in the morning etc, VERY often they transmit the bug to others, usually on their table or in their particular group of friends gets sick or the runs as well.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I accept your apology. Those sort of bugs are more infectious before the symptoms show. Children do recover quickly, and can be fine the next day without being infectious.
I do accept that parents have to work nowadays and school is sometimes used as a child minding service rather than an educational establisment.
Btw I managed to catch chicken pox from my children as I'd never had it as a child myself. I would want every child, to have it as a child, because as an adult I was very, very ill for two weeks. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
