A cheaper break for families: stagger school holidays and expand purchased leave

The cost-of-living problem hiding in the calendar

Most full-time employees in Australia receive four weeks of paid annual leave. Schools close for about 12 weeks. For households in which both parents work full-time—and for working sole parents—that leaves an eight-week gap to cover with vacation care, help from family, flexible work or unpaid leave.

The same calendar creates a second squeeze. When large numbers of families are available to travel at the same time, demand for flights, accommodation and holiday programs surges. Families either pay the peak premium, stay home, or take children out of school to travel at a cheaper time.

That is a cost-of-living problem designed into the calendar. It is particularly hard to justify while household budgets are under sustained pressure—and it can be eased without a large new subsidy.

What families stand to save

The scenarios in the appendix compare peak and off-peak prices for a family of four taking a seven-night trip from Melbourne. The modelled saving ranges from $2,175 for a Gold Coast driving holiday to $3,530 for flights to Cairns. The Gold Coast flight scenario saves $3,495.

In the low-income household scenario, that is equivalent to 16.7% to 27.1% of annual discretionary savings. These are illustrative comparisons, not a promise that every fare or room will become cheaper. They show the scale of the premium created when demand is compressed into a few common dates.

A family holiday is discretionary, but the underlying pressure is not. The same compressed calendar drives competition for vacation care, constrains when parents can take leave and leaves families with fewer affordable choices. Policy should focus on reducing the avoidable peak, not compensating every household for higher prices.

Two reforms that work together

1. Stagger school holidays by region

State and territory education ministers should coordinate holiday zones across and, where useful, within states. Winter, spring and selected summer breaks could begin on different dates, with preferred windows rotating so no community is permanently advantaged. Common dates could remain where national alignment matters.

The reform would not reduce teaching days or shorten holidays. It would spread demand for travel, accommodation and care across a wider window. Calendars should be published several years ahead so families, schools and employers can plan.

2. Give employees a right to request purchased leave

The federal government should add a right for permanent employees to request purchased leave to the National Employment Standards. A default 48/52 arrangement would let an employee fund four extra weeks away from work by spreading the salary reduction across the year.

Purchased leave is not free: employees trade income for time. Its value is that it makes the cost predictable and can give families access to a cheaper holiday window, as well as reduce their need for paid vacation care. Requests could be refused on reasonable business grounds, as other workplace flexibility requests can be.

Access should be universal, not limited to parents. That keeps the scheme simple, avoids a new stigma around care and makes the reform fair to employees with other responsibilities. Superannuation should continue to be calculated on ordinary pre-reduction salary unless an employee elects otherwise.

The two reforms are stronger as a package. Staggering spreads demand and reduces the peak premium. Purchased leave gives working families a practical way to use their allocated window. Either measure helps; together, they connect lower prices with the time needed to reach them.

The gains extend beyond travel

Less pressure on care and household budgets

More leave does not close the full eight-week care gap, but it narrows it. Families would have more scope to combine annual leave, purchased leave and vacation care without relying as heavily on unpaid leave or informal arrangements.

Better workforce participation

School-holiday care still falls disproportionately on women. A predictable way to buy additional leave can reduce last-minute absences and make it easier for parents to remain in secure work. Employers gain a planned staffing conversation instead of recurring care emergencies.

Stronger school attendance

A wider range of affordable dates reduces the incentive to extend a holiday into term time. That supports attendance without punishing families for responding to a price signal created by government-set calendars.

Smoother demand for regional economies and roads

Regional tourism businesses would face a longer, steadier season rather than an acute rush followed by idle capacity. Spreading departures would also ease pressure on highways and destinations. Western Australian modelling suggests staggered holidays could add 730,000 visitor nights, $299 million in visitor spending and more than 2,100 ongoing regional jobs, while reducing peak prices at major destinations by up to 24%.

These are established policy tools

Australia would not be starting from scratch. Purchased leave already appears in Australian public-sector and private enterprise agreements. Similar leave-purchase arrangements are a common employee benefit in the United Kingdom, while Dutch collective agreements let employees exchange salary or bonuses for additional leave.

Staggered calendars are also well tested. Germany coordinates and rotates summer holidays across its 16 states. France staggers winter and spring breaks across three zones. The Netherlands rotates summer, autumn and spring breaks across North, Central and South regions.

Each model reflects local geography and institutions. Australia should do the same: retain state control of school calendars, agree national design principles and use regional zones where they will materially spread demand.

A credible path to delivery

This package is politically achievable because it has a low direct fiscal cost, preserves teaching time and builds on workplace arrangements that employers already administer. It needs disciplined design, not a new national bureaucracy.

Reduce the premium, not the family holiday

Not every cost-of-living measure needs to be a payment or subsidy. Governments can also remove rules that concentrate demand and push prices up. Staggered school holidays would reduce the peak; purchased leave would give more families the time to benefit.

The proposition is simple: spread the dates, make time more flexible and let families keep more of their money. In a cost-of-living crisis, that is a reform worth pursuing.

Appendix: Illustrative peak and off-peak travel costs

The estimates below model a family of four—two adults and two children—taking a seven-night holiday from Melbourne. The Gold Coast scenarios compare flying and driving, while the Cairns scenario assumes flying because the distance makes a seven-night driving holiday impractical.

How to read the impact table: “Percentage points preserved” is the reduction in the share of annual discretionary savings consumed by the holiday. “Saving weeks avoided” is the difference between the modelled weeks of household saving required for peak and off-peak travel. These scenario estimates illustrate relative affordability and are not price forecasts; actual costs will vary by travel dates, booking time, household choices, and market conditions.