I don't get your argument. You do realize if you wanted to run longer school years it would automatically cost more money, right?

It costs working parents more to place kids for 4 weeks than the increase in school tax would be to pay for A/C and hourly staff.
Any salaried employees are already paid for and I see no reason why in THIS country they should NOT be working while being paid.

"Any salaried employees are already paid for and I see no reason why in THIS country they should NOT be working while being paid." Can you explain this? Who is being paid while not working?

Sorry, Bob, but in this case I don't follow the union "line" that annual salaries have to be increased - just so that someone actually works the "annum", of course minus the customary 2 to 6 weeks paid vacation (based on seniority) that the workforce in the U.S. typically receives (and with 6 weeks I'm already being highly generous, if not outright unrealistic).

If they have no interest in annual employment, then the person should become an hourly laborer, where they get paid by the hour.

Consequently, there would of course be additional cost for hourly workers and energy/facility costs - but this would be offset by paying third parties to "entertain/enrich" kids during those summer months. So I see no reason why this country would be unable match civilized nations (and many developing nations) in providing students with more than 180 days of education each year!?

Just running the school longer has built in costs without regard to the staff compensation. Basically you are saying that all those companies deserve increased compensation for the extension in the length of the school year, but the staff that really makes a school a school does not. That's pretty insulting, Andy. Maybe you should increase the amount of time you give scuba lessons for the same price just because people will learn more scuba skills.

I actually do - it's an activity in a hostile environment and I'm sending someone's loved one off feeling competent/confident that they'll be able to manage themselves and whatever foreseeable incidents.
So - there are no shortcuts. Once I make a commitment to people, I will do my darnest to deliver. Not for legal liability reasons - because it's the RIGHT thing to do.

Consequently, I always offer students to keep coming in (at no extra cost) and meet me for additional pool time(s), before they expect my signature to go on a scuba certification; and once a month I am at the pool (unpaid) conducting refresher sessions for people who need to finetune their skills after a break.

I'm not paid "by the hour", but per class/number of students. Consequently, I will need to work until I have taught them the best I can.

"Once I make a commitment to people, I will do my darnest to deliver. Not for legal liability reasons - because it's the RIGHT thing to do."

What do you think our teachers do in Mahwah already during the school year? Your analogy fails. What you want is for every staff member to work any extra 20 days for free, while everyone else involved with increasing the school year gets a raise because you have this ideological shortcoming that the school staff in our district is overpaid. That is what you are saying.

Sorry Bob, I was simply responding to your challenge that I "should increase the amount of time you give scuba lessons for the same price just because people will learn more scuba skills", advising you that's that precisely what I do.

I consider myself a professional who get's paid to accomplish certain results in people - not an hourly laborer. Internationally we don't accomplish the desired results in our pupils, and I believe the huge disconnected caused by an excessive summer vacation is one important factor. Consequenty, I propose that the 180 day minimum - and the country permitting that we are actually teaching "to the minimum" - be addressed.

I am not challenging your urging to increase the school year. I am challenging your theory that staff should not be compensated for working a longer school year. It's just absurd to say otherwise.

If you really want to save money have them go 360 days a year.
Then skip senior year altogether.

Frianna, following your logic, if kids want 360 days of vacation, THAT is the "right" amount? Look - the extra 20 days of vacation, snow days, teacher conference days and various other excuses in the U.S. each year is the equivalent of ONE month per year that kids don't go to school - which adds up to a complete year by 12th grade.

So - in international comparison - NONE of our kids actually finish 12th grade - they all think they are ready for college after the equivalent of 11th grade -- AND it shows.
We start with VERY strong pre-schoolers and kindergartners on year 1 - and end up trailing the pack even against DEVELOPING nations by the time we have kept them OUT of school all this time.

It's not about that. It's about being able to have graduation indoors.