School Ownership & School Holidays

[pickledseal]

Gove's latest two ideas...

1) Allowing privatisation of schools to be run at a profit: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...let-firms-run-schools-for-profit-8682395.html

2) Allowing schools to pick school holidays and even reduce them: http://news.sky.com/story/1110381

What do the masses think?

Consensus from teachers seems to be very bad news on the first, and that the 2nd is unlikely to go too far beyond what is already in place.

I like to hear parents, financial peeps views despite some people just wanting to slag public sector.

 

[MK Shrimper]

1) Ho hum, the privitisation of everything, profit is king. The Tory mantra. God forbid anything is run as a public service anymore **shudder** that's like communist Russia. :zzzzz:

2) A disaster. Two kids of different ages at different schools who then choose different dates for their holidays?

Gove is an absolute **** in a Government stuffed to the gills with them.

 

[londonblue]

1) Ho hum, the privitisation of everything, profit is king. The Tory mantra. God forbid anything is run as a public service anymore **shudder** that's like communist Russia. :zzzzz:

2) A disaster. Two kids of different ages at different schools who then choose different dates for their holidays?

Gove is an absolute **** in a Government stuffed to the gills with them.

Easily dealt with. Just take one out of school, but make sure it's the cheaper one!

 

[Mad Cyril]

I don't see why schools shouldn't be run for profit.

Instead of pointless subjects such as French and English literature kids could spend a few hours a week making trainers and smartphones.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

schools are increasingly staffed by short term foreigm national agency staff and there are reasons for that and Gove is the main one.

 

[Neil_F]

Gove's latest two ideas...

1) Allowing privatisation of schools to be run at a profit: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...let-firms-run-schools-for-profit-8682395.html

2) Allowing schools to pick school holidays and even reduce them: http://news.sky.com/story/1110381

What do the masses think?

I'm sure we've seen the first item many times before and it has never happened.

There is a fundamental problem with this story: privatising existing schools would be illegal. I'm not an expert but I understand that the charitable trusts owning schools could not legally transfer assets to for profit schools. I suppose they could contract out services to a for-profit company, which must already happen, but that is not the same as running it.

Of course it is possible that new schools could be setup and run for profit. I personally would have no problem with this at all. Introducing competition is the best way to improve productivity and quality and I would have no objection to either my tax money going to for profit companies if it meant a good education or sending my own child there if it meant a good education.

The advantage that is has is that for profit schools that are not very good will have to close as parents won't want to send their children there. It won't be necessary to allocate children to places as happens with LEA schools.

On the holidays, I'm in favour of schools having more autonomy. I suspect the vast majority would elect to maintain the existing holidays but at least they had the power to do something different.

 

[C C Csiders]

The answer is simple. Anything that Gove proposes is a very silly idea from a very silly little man.

 

[MK Shrimper]

On the holidays, I'm in favour of schools having more autonomy. I suspect the vast majority would elect to maintain the existing holidays but at least they had the power to do something different.

And so would Thomas Cook etc as they'd ramp their prices up all year I'm sure. Wonderful for those without kids/retired/pre schoolers.

 

[South Bank Hank]

And so would Thomas Cook etc as they'd ramp their prices up all year I'm sure. Wonderful for those without kids/retired/pre schoolers.

No they wouldn't Paul. It's a market economy driven by supply and demand. The only reason they CAN ramp them up during consistent school holidays is the fact that they ARE consistent meaning demand outweighs supply.

 

[dloman]

1st idea a big no, 2nd a very big yes. As SBH it's only market demands that force up the holiday prices. As long as it is either agreed council wise or maybe county wide i really cannot see an issue with it, in fact i think you will find the majority of parents will be for it.

 

[MK Shrimper]

I wish I could share your optimism regarding supply & demand but I can see them hiking prices all year round.

 

[OldBlueLady]

1. We've already kind of been down this route before with Grant Maintained, Trusts and Academies, it's only a similar set up with slightly different objectives.
2. We already have Greensward locally that (I think) runs a 5 term year with no half term holidays but 2 weeks at the end of each term and extra weeks tagged on to equate to the summer/winter breaks.

Personally, I think the Christmas holiday should be at least one week longer and the summer a week shorter.

 

[Beefy]

I wish I could share your optimism regarding supply & demand but I can see them hiking prices all year round.

They'd go bust if they did that.

Travel companies don't make good profits nowadays.

 

[Firestorm]

Profitability requirements will lead to cost cutting.

Combine this with flexible holidays and watch the winter Holidays lengthen (and the associated heating costs reduce)

 

[MK Shrimper]

They'd go bust if they did that.

Travel companies don't make good profits nowadays.

Why would they? They have a captive market.

 

[Napster]

Why would they? They have a captive market.

No they don't. It's not a necessity.

 

[MK Shrimper]

No they don't. It's not a necessity.

Can't see what that's got to do with anything. It's not now and people still go on holiday.

 

[South Bank Hank]

I wish I could share your optimism regarding supply & demand but I can see them hiking prices all year round.

Any business can hike its prices all year round. Any customer can then tell them to go **** themselves. Which they would do. Which would send Thomas Cook bust. Which I now realise is just what Beefy says.

There is little or no money in the travel industry so they're hardly fleecing us.

 

[Napster]

Can't see what that's got to do with anything. It's not now and people still go on holiday.

Eh? You just said it's a captive market. It's not. People can choose not to go.

 

[MK Shrimper]

Any business can hike its prices all year round. Any customer can then tell them to go **** themselves. Which they would do. Which would send Thomas Cook bust. Which I now realise is just what Beefy says.

There is little or no money in the travel industry so they're hardly fleecing us.

Yes, but if they all do it from the smallest guest house in Chalkwell to a 5-star luxury holiday in Martinique? People will still go on holiday and will still pay the inflated prices.

Eh? You just said it's a captive market. It's not. People can choose not to go.

Well maybe not the right business term, but again, as above.