Term Time Holidays – The Arguments Can Continue.

What if you can afford it but just don’t particularly like getting utterly shafted for a holiday that was literally a third of the price the previous week?

Suck it up buttercup. You chose to have the kids, deal with the consequences of your choices.

convert – Member
Its been a long day, either im missing something or i womt be investimg im Footlaps Corp.
For my own interests I had a quick look at TUI’s figures over the last few years – in a former life I worked for a firm that was bought up by TUI. In the last 10 years they don’t seem to have posted figures with a profit margin ratio of greater than 6% and that was a standout year from one of the most successful firms in the sector. That’s dire – healthy in most industries would be around 30%. Whilst it might seem like you are being ‘ripped off’ by greedy companies in high season that’s a very sucky return. Definitely not to be invested in!

You do know its 2017 right? For any company in most sectors to be posting double digit growth would be a good if not exceptional year. To suggest thast 6% growth is “dire” and 30% acceptable is frankly quite bonkers, especially when you consider the threat on airline & european business from multiple directions such as terrorism and the weaker £1.

Your earlier post was clearer to you and footflaps acknowledging my first which remains correct; The higher prices and volumes of non term holiday makers supplement the lower prices empty planes/hotels of term time, thats obvious and undisputed. For footflaps to suggest plane seats are rationed is – at least without evidence – ludicrous – as mentioned in the last three summer holidasy period theres not been an obvious empty seat to span that I’ve been on.

Vis a Vis, yesterday I re-created our August holiday that we originally booked in February. Its 25% more expensive and about 50% more expensive than if we flew out next week. So I could get on the same plane, go to the same hotel and have the same experience with the exception of a slighly cooler climate and pay 50% less. Just to apply that to the current argument roughly speaking that equates to £1800, yet I’d have to pay £60 to take jnr out of school with permission.

So I’d save £1740. Not really to be sniffed at is it? The moral fact then becomes is that £1740 worth Jnr missing school for 7 school days? My choice is to accept that, or go on a £1740 cheaper holiday in August and allow jnr to remain in school.

newrobdob – Member
Poor analogy – you don’t have to go on holiday so you can choose not to pay the £3000 extra.

reluctantlondoner – Member
Suck it up buttercup. You chose to have the kids, deal with the consequences of your choices.

Or… I can choose not to “suck it up”, take my kids out of school, go on holiday, and not pay £3000 extra for it. 😀

I’m a bit confused by what the argument is now, the parents taking their kids out of school to go on a cheaper holiday are saving what? Hundreds, potentially thousands of pounds and are complaining about a £60 fine? Is it the money that annoys them? Or is the principle? (was tempted to do a cr*p pun then, but thought better of it!). A couple on here seem to have no problem with being able to afford it after all.

If the latter then surely they can appreciate that the rules are there not to target them, but to control the “lowest common denominator” and make life easier for those who are in what is already a pretty unenviable trade? Do I just have more empathy for the teachers? Or too little empathy for the value of cheap holidays for my kids?

Or… I can choose not to “suck it up”, take my kids out of school, go on holiday, and not pay £3000 extra for it.

Please do us all a favour and announce to the forum exactly when you do this so that we can all make sure to be somewhere very different.

Peyote: my argument is basically

A) the fines only punish people who would save less than £60 on their holiday

B) there are pretty clear reasons why people take kids out: some people can’t get time off during the school holidays and some people don’t want to get shafted by 300% price increases. You won’t stop people taking kids out unless these are addressed somehow.

some people don’t want to get shafted by 300% price increases.

Wrong, they just want to make sure they get bragging rights over the Joneses about the fancy holiday they went in, just the same as buying their new Audi helped in the driveway wars.

Screw the kids education, they just want to show off.

Please do us all a favour and announce to the forum exactly when you do this so that we can all make sure to be somewhere very different.

Well presumably you’ll all be stuck at work with you kids in school. 😉

But for the record, this year I took my kids out for four days before the Feb half term so we could go skiing in the 3 Valleys.
The kids are 3 & 6, I had the school’s permission, and I don’t think it massively hurt their degree prospects.
They spent a week in the mountains being active, trying new foods and learning some French. We caught up what little missed schoolwork there was during half term.

No regrets.

It’s not as if this is a new thing, holidays have always been more expensive around kids holidays. Kids holidays are going to be more anyway as they are based around public holidays and the best weather.

If you can save £3k by going in term time then you must be going on some seriously fancy holidays – no sympathy from me -sorry!

Bragging rights? 😆
My “new Audi” is a ten year old second hand Ford Focus. My mountain bike is a steel hardtail from 2003.

We don’t go on “fancy holidays” to brag about it. We go because we enjoy them. Most of our holidays involve camping in the UK.

Screw the kids education, they just want to show off.

Or they want some time with the family as one week away has no effect on their education.

Or they want some time with the family

Which can easily be done in the school holidays for minimal cost.

What none of you will admit is that you could have a perfectly good cheap family holiday in your kids holiday periods – but not to the fancy places you feel you have to go to to keep up with the Joneses.

there are pretty clear reasons why people take kids out: some people can’t get time off during the school holidays and some people don’t want to get shafted by 300% price increases.

And this is where I have some sympathy. There is a system in place that allows headteachers some discretion. Is it being used amicably and fairly however? Is the stage of schooling the child is in and the time in the academic year being taken into account? A parent that simply can’t take away with their child in the holiday period (and maybe has a letter from their employer backing this up) should be treated differently to a parent wanting to save a few quid or more accurately get a more salubrious holiday than they could otherwise afford. Provided that it’s not 4 times a year and they are doing their best to mitigate the issue and their child is not in dire straights academically or the time of year is not catastrophic for their child’s educational welfare.

This is where I have to declare my hand – in my role in an independent school I get requests all the time for students to have time off. It is my role to be the arbiter, although I have one person more senior than me to back up my judgement. Some are pretty clear cut easy to grant situations. Other parents quite frankly need saving from themselves, or rather their kids need saving from their parents’ whims. The school takes a tough line and will not sanction time away that is not considered reasonable- we don’t get strong armed by fee paying parents. Parents who remove their kids anyway in this situation anyway find themselves in a meeting with the managing head with a pretty clear message that their child’s place in the school is at risk unless they abide by what they signed up for. To be honest that has more bite than a £60 fine will ever have but with are in the enviable situation to be able to act like that although it rarely happens. Mostly it’s about educating the parents about being a responsible parent. I am talking about 6th form here mind – the stakes for missing vital weeks of school for a skiing holiday are pretty high.

Which can easily be done in the school holidays for minimal cost.

Not if you’re not off during the holidays.

What none of you will admit is that you could have a perfectly good cheap family holiday in your kids holiday periods – but not to the fancy places you feel you have to go to to keep up with the Joneses.

It’s not about that in my case.

And this is where I have some sympathy. There is a system in place that allows headteachers some discretion. Is it being used amicably and fairly however? Is the stage of schooling the child is in and the time in the academic year being taken into account? A parent that simply can’t take away with their child in the holiday period (and maybe has a letter from their employer backing this up) should be treated differently to a parent wanting to save a few quid or more accurately get a salubrious holiday than they could otherwise afford. Provided that it’s not 4 times a year and they are doing their best to mitigate the issue and their child is not is dire straights academically or the time of year is not catastrophic for their child’s educational welfare.

Precisely.

Are you saying you can never get any time off at all during your kids holidays? Not buying that.

If you can save £3k by going in term time then you must be going on some seriously fancy holidays

You think? Here is an example I posted last time this came up. This isn’t cherry-picked, this is a “fancy holiday” we went on, a week skiing in France:

That price is per-person. There were five of us. How much did going in term time save?

Thanks Graham

A) the fines only punish people who would save less than £60 on their holiday

So “increase the fines to make them work” I suppose would be the response to that

B) there are pretty clear reasons why people take kids out: some people can’t get time off during the school holidays

Surely these people have made a choice to take that job/career path and should accept the consequences of their choices though? Expecting others to work around this seems a bit… …selfish (for want of a better non inflammatory word)

and some people don’t want to get shafted by 300% price increases.

Again, isn’t this something that people should take into account when choosing where/when to go on holiday though? Or even when they factor in having/accepting responsibility for having kids, same as the additional food, clothes, utilities that having to support 1+ additional lives requires.

Are you saying you can never get any time off at all during your kids holidays? Not buying that

I’m not a teacher, neither is my wife. Getting a week off together is rare and usually outside the school holidays. Not sure why you think I’d be lying.

Surely these people have made a choice to take that job/career path and should accept the consequences of their choices though? Expecting others to work around this seems a bit… …selfish (for want of a better non inflammatory word)

Yeah **** ’em.

Yeah **** ’em.

Who? The education professionals or the parents who want the holidays?

So “increase the fines to make them work” I suppose would be the response to that

You’d just end up punishing poorer families who are going on holidays where the fine is more than they would save.

Look at the example above. You’d have to make the fine five grand to impact that one!

Expecting others to work around this seems a bit… …selfish

Two things: society makes all kinds of concessions for people with kids. They are a fact of life.

Secondly, if done sensibly, taking the kids out of school should require no significant “working around” by anyone.

isn’t this something that people should take into account when choosing where/when to go on holiday though?

It is. So they adjust the “when” by going in term time.

Who? The education professionals or the parents who want the holidays?

The parents who chose a different career to you.

Wrong, they just want to make sure they get bragging rights over the Joneses about the fancy holiday they went in, just the same as buying their new Audi helped in the driveway wars.

Screw the kids education, they just want to show off.

I love this bitter bullshit.

Since when is saving £1000’s showing off? If I choose to pay extra for a fancy holiday becuase I can afford it, thats my choice. However as I said, some (inc. me) are not in the position where looking a £1000 saving gift horse in the mouth is a luxury to be disregarded.

The choice is a £940 money saved once you take of the £60 fine vs the morals of kids out of school. I’m not going to preach which is wring or right, its your choice.

I don’t see that any difference whether you’re holiday is £10000 or £100, money saved is money saved vs the moral issue.

You’d have to make the fine five grand to impact that one!

It’d pay for free school meals!

Two things: society makes all kinds of concessions for people with kids. They are a fact of life.

Secondly, if done sensibly, taking the kids out of school should require no significant “working around” by anyone.

Agreed, I’m not sure that completely negates my point though. Isn’t it a matter of how significant those concessions are? “If done sensibly” is the key bit though isn’t it. As ever, it boils down to the those who take the rip, and making rules to cater for them.

The parents who chose a different career to you.

Interesting assumption, but anyway, no don’t “**** ’em”. Give them as much leeway as you can within the system, ultimately we all make choices in our lives, if you can’t live with those choices you change them, no?

Or change the system of course, which is another alternative explored earlier on in this thread…

To those sticking to the ‘you made your bed now lie in it’ line as a general point to parents – we can ask another question:

Why make someone’s life needlessly more difficult?

(Note that I am not advocating parents are able to take kids out whenever they want – I am in favour of mutual planning by school and family and head’s discretion.)

Well presumably you’ll all be stuck at work with you kids in school.

No.

I don’t have children and I actively seek to avoid exposure to them.

I like it when parents play fair and stick to allotted holidays to allow for a degree of segregation.

Why make someone’s life needlessly more difficult?

“Why make teachers lives more needlessly difficult for the sake of someone’s holiday?” would I’m sure be an appropriate counter-question.

I don’t have children and I actively seek to avoid exposure to them.

Then I’d suggest you are not well placed to comment on parenting issues.

I like it when parents play fair

Fair is an interesting term.

Look at the prices I posted. Tell me what is “fair” about that ~300% price increase?

Consider parents who can’t get time off together during school holidays. What is “fair” about telling them they just don’t get to go on holiday till the kids grow up?

Consider parents who can’t get time off together during school holidays. What is “fair” about telling them they just don’t get to go on holiday till the kids grow up?

You realise you can’t win this Graham, vs those whom you’re arguing with. Whilst you and I “selfishly” chose to have children, and “selfishly” do our best to bring them up in the best possible way, there is of course no way we’ve compromised our own lives is there? Whilst those that “unselfishly” don’t have kids and the associated responsibility to another spunk thier money away on themselves.

Its an amazing attitude I’ve come across before – “I won’t have little brats becuase that would impact my life” – who’s selfish now?

Becuase wh chose that path doesn’t mean we need to piss away our wages needlessly. Nor does it mean we should voluntarly halt the finer things in life within our financial reach and there be subject to penalty.

“Why make teachers lives more needlessly difficult for the sake of someone’s holiday?” would I’m sure be an appropriate counter-question

The many teachers I’ve spoke to say it doesn’t.

“Why make teachers lives more needlessly difficult for the sake of someone’s holiday?” would I’m sure be an appropriate counter-question.

My question was more general – not specifically related to kids and school holidays.

It’s the attitude of ‘you had kids, you have to put up with <insert issue here>’ that I am questioning, but only lightly.

Its an amazing attitude I’ve come across before – “I won’t have little brats becuase that would impact my life” – who’s selfish now?

Can you be selfish at the expense of someone who doesn’t exist?

The many teachers I’ve spoke to say it doesn’t.

Well if the teachers are happy with it, then so am I! As Mols almost said “Why make someone’s life more difficult if three’s no need for it?”.

Wonder what the driver behind the policy was?

Can you be selfish at the expense of someone who doesn’t exist?

The basis is that “not having children” was used as excuse to continue a vastly more materialistic life.

I’m not against that, everyone’s free to make thier own decisions but you can’t cry foul against the “selfishness” of a parent wanting to save money when using that excuse.

“Not sure why you think I’d be lying.”

I worked in retail for 12 years, my wife did the same. I had to book all my holidays off between 14-16 MONTHS in advance. No time allowed off at bank holidays or November/December so you can imagine how crowded the rest of the available spots were. But we always managed to get 4 weeks off together.

“That price is per-person. There were five of us. How much did going in term time save?”

A skiing trip to France? Not exactly a necessary thing to do is it? Sorry absolutely no sympathy from me. Suck it up princess.

Look I am sorry you’ve got kids. But that’s your choice. The increased cost during their holidays is something that’s been around for decades so it shouldn’t be surprised. You could just as easily rent a lovely cottage in the U.K. for the cost of one of your family to go on the skiing trip. And then you could have precious family time together AND save even more money AND your kids will have 100% of their very precious education.

Why make someone’s life more difficult if three’s no need for it?”.

Exactly. It makes my life more difficult.

But we always managed to get 4 weeks off together.

Must be nice. I work in the NHS as does my wife we’re lucky to get 2 weeks off together and it’s not in school holidays.

Exactly. It makes my life more difficult.

But is there a need for it? The teachers you’ve questioned don’t appear to believe so. But is that the case for all within the education profession?

If yes, then why is such a policy in place?

If no, then I’m afraid I revert to my original argument. You makes your choices, you take the responsibility of those choices.

A skiing trip to France? Not exactly a necessary thing to do is it?

No you’re right, it’s not. Not many holidays are “necessary” though are they?

Sorry absolutely no sympathy from me.

Yes we’ve established that you think a week skiing in France is a “seriously fancy holiday” that I foolishly only take to keep up with the Joneses. So I don’t expect any sympathy.

Suck it up princess.

Or… y’know.. don’t!

You could just as easily rent a lovely cottage in the U.K. for the cost of one of your family to go on the skiing trip.

UK cottages have notoriously poor snow conditions though. 🙂

Also did you miss the bit where I said most of our holidays are camping in the UK?

newrobdob – Member

“That price is per-person. There were five of us. How much did going in term time save?”

A skiing trip to France? Not exactly a necessary thing to do is it? Sorry absolutely no sympathy from me. Suck it up princess.

Genuine question – is your life surround by only exactly what is you need to survive? And you’ve never bought anything which could be remotely superflous to survival?

But is there a need for it? The teachers you’ve questioned don’t appear to believe so. But is that the case for all within the education profession?

The need to some time together as falmily? Yeah it’s a pretty big need.

If no, then I’m afraid I revert to my original argument. You makes your choices, you take the responsibility of those choices.

But when I made my career choice and later to have kids this wasn’t in. Up here it only came to effect 5 years ago, 5 years after my kids started school.