Yes, that is the case for me as a public sector employer. Some years ago I did a training course in Preston and travelled from London using Virgin, and on the way back the FC ticket was exactly the same price as the standard one so I of course bought it, and then spent some time having to show evidence to our admin officer that they weren't paying me any more expenses than they would have been anyway!
Not all that unusual, it just happens when the lowest price bands for standard class Advances sell out faster than the lowest price bands for first class Advances
I've travelled in standard on a first class ticket before, as at my workplace the policy forbids travelling first class, but does permit buying a first class ticket and travelling in standard if that's cheaper.
That's an odd policy.
What an odd policy! How would it be checked?
It's not odd, it's a common sense policy. Really, we should all be outraged that in e.g. the Civil Service, people are chucking tax money down the drain to buy standard class tickets when there are cheaper first class ones available. That's the definition of stupidity and originates from the sort of expenses policy that has been drafted out of fear of the Daily Mail writing a clickbait headline and is more concerned with perceptions than reality.
Forgive me if I misunderstood, but why would they make you travel in standard?
This is what I thought was odd- not the fact you were buying the cheapest tickets!
A lot of it appears to be down to perceptions, i.e. it's "bad" if some workers are seen to be in first - even if it's the most cost-effective option.
I'm not convinced it's common sense - I'd go with cowardly. Spokespeople shouldn't be hiding away from the mere idea of a press statement which says, "For this particular journey, 1st class was cheaper than standard class at the time of purchasing."
You can guess what would happen though wouldn't you, there'd be a FOIA for data broken down by ticket type class, or some member of staff would leave their lanyard on / do some work on the train in the presence of someone else there.
I'd be surprised if those FOI requests don't happen already anyway.
It is an odd policy because they are allowed to buy a first class ticket but not sit in first class, even though they are buying said ticket because it is cheaper.
I imagine the logic is along the lines of: only takes one first class ticket being purchased for you to be able to write a clickbait tabloid article about lazy public sector workers living it up in first class while the rest of us put up with under-inflation payrises etc. It doesn't need to be based in truth.
How does one actually know one is a civil servant when travelling in first? Unless they publicly proclaim it to all, I don't see how one could know.
See post #16
Sure, I guess I just see it as a sad state of affairs if we have spokespeople employed in government departments (they all have them), who would rather take a bigger budget hit, or even buy the 1st class ticket then tell the staffer to sit in standard class; instead of simply saying, "Our policy is to buy standard class tickets, except in cases where 1st class tickets are cheaper. 99.9% of our ticket purchases are therefore for standard class, and 1st class tickets are only purchased when it would save the taxpayer money compared to buying standard class."
Clearly, you've never been a Civil Servant and experienced the kind of people who are responsible for government PR (or setting expenses rules ...). I'm still scarred by my 25 years of interacting with such persons ...
I work in the public sector although not in government. We can travel in First provided that the journey is over 2.5 hours (in effect, anything beyond York) and that we actually work (so, when doing the odd bit of work travel at weekends I tend to send emails to demonstrate this). Generally the cost of of a split ticket plus a Seatfrog upgrade is less than the cost of an open standard single and is what I usually do. Sometimes a seatfrog can be quite absurd - tomorrow I am travelling from Edinburgh to London and paid just £13 for the upgrade - and amounts to less than the cost of lunch which, as I will be fed and watered on the train, I don't need to buy. When it's framed like this nobody loses out at all. Not even the DM could complain!
First class was officially 'subject to availability'.
I can only imagine it's to avoid the perception of largesse. The policy does not explain itself in this regard, though.
No, and I wouldn't be surprised if the custom of travelling in standard on a first class ticket is one more honoured in the breach than the observance.
I think a lot of assumptions are made regarding travel expenses which have no basis in fact.
I'm sure that will vary by organisation, but typically in my experience overnight accommodation must be justified. So you'd either have to show it was the only practical option, or it resulted in an overall saving once the difference in train fares was taken into account. How well understood, applied and enforced any of this another question, but most policies I've seen are less unreasonable than you might suspect.
