#Opinion by Poon Siu-to 潘小濤｜"It is foreseeable that the day the overall situation in Hong Kong will be finalized when the pro-establishment camp is purged, and all the formerly smugly favored ones are eliminated."

Read more: https://bit.ly/3giX8xc

"可以預見，香港大局已定之日，就是建制派被清洗之時，之前春風得意的「紅人」皆被淘汰。"
________
📱Download the app:
http://onelink.to/appledailyapp
📰 Latest news:
http://appledaily.com/engnews/
🐤 Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/appledaily_hk
💪🏻 Subscribe and show your support:
https://bit.ly/2ZYKpHP
#AppleDailyENG

Oh my goodness I feel so embarrassed that a grown man can capitalize on the elderly pump attendant’s “mistake” but hey! Petrol in YOUR BMW already!!!! 🙄🙄🙄🙄 Caltex Singapore

UPDATE: Caltex has made an official annoucement that they are looking into this incident. Whether the driver is innocent anot lets leave it for them to investigate and decide. Most importantly is they are certain that the uncle will not have to pay for the loss. Lets not share nor comment anymore, be it he is right or wrong, at the end of the day one has to answer to his/ her own conscience.
Just like some people condemned me for being a busybody complain queen sharing this post when it is not my business. You may feel my way of paying my social responsibility is against your personal morality, but at the end of the day it is whether i can answer to my own conscience.
(But hor, if i kena death threat, you all will protect me anot😂?)

{Dear Caltex,

I earlier witnessed an incident at Caltex Tampines Ave 8 @2pm on 14 April and it filled me with such indignation that it prompted me to write this to you, hoping that you could help alleviate the financial obligation of your employee and implement appropriate measures to handle the incident as follows.

While processing payment at the Cashier counter, the customer (picture uploaded herewith) and driver of BMW vehicle SLT6883G, claimed that your pump attendant had mistakenly refilled a full tank of petrol costing about $135 for his vehicle instead of the $10 petrol that he had instructed. He refused to pay the full amount and insisted to pay only $10 for the full tank.

The pump attendant probably in his early 60s, was subsequently summoned to the Cashier counter to verify. He explained that he had heard that it was a full tank refill but the customer immediately rebutted it. What happened next astonished me. Instead of creating a scene by engaging in an argument with the customer, the elderly pump attendant calmly informed the Cashier to let the customer pay $10 and he would personally absorb the rest of the cost. As a result, the customer walked away smugly paying a mere $10 payment for a full tank of petrol for his BMW Series 5 vehicle.

Whilst I was impressed with the collected composure and professional customer service that both your Cashier and pump attendant had displayed throughout the incident, I am deeply disturbed that the customer had capitalized on the opportunity to make the elderly pump attendant pay for the supposedly oversight. The customer could have responded gentlemanly and be gracious to forgive by paying for the petrol since his vehicle would need to consume it anyway. Alternatively, he could have paid for a partial amount instead of making the elderly pump attendant bear the full $125. Unfortunately, this was not so.

I have done some online research and noticed that the remuneration of a pump attendant averages about $1600/mth in Singapore. $125 means a significant 8% of his meagre salary. Would Caltex consider waiving this amount or allowing the pump attendant to pay at cost?

Also, assuming it was entirely the pump attendant’s oversight, under such circumstances, perhaps the Cashier could have proposed to the customer to pay for a partial amount instead of allowing the elderly pump attendant bear full monetary responsibility?

Alternatively, for proof of evidence, perhaps Caltex can install CCTVs equipped with audio recording of drivers’ instructions to the pump attendants at each pump? What are Caltex’s existing guidelines and policies to handle such situation? I am concerned that if no effective standard operating systems are defined, such practices of having pump attendants to bear the price discrepancies can lead to abuse. Imagine if one uses this approach on each petrol station in Singapore every few days, it is tantamount to one walking away striking lottery frequently and the accumulated value will be very substantial!}

*Original post by Ms Kelly Yeo.
I copied the context incase her post got taken down. Please hunt this fucker down!

#caltex #slt6883g

SLT 6883 G

UPDATE: Caltex has made an official annoucement that they are looking into this incident. Whether the driver is innocent anot lets leave it for them to investigate and decide. Most importantly is they are certain that the uncle will not have to pay for the loss. Lets not share nor comment anymore, be it he is right or wrong, at the end of the day one has to answer to his/ her own conscience.
Just like some people condemned me for being a busybody complain queen sharing this post when it is not my business. You may feel my way of paying my social responsibility is against your personal morality, but at the end of the day it is whether i can answer to my own conscience.
(But hor, if i kena death threat, you all will protect me anot😂?)

{Dear Caltex,

I earlier witnessed an incident at Caltex Tampines Ave 8 @2pm on 14 April and it filled me with such indignation that it prompted me to write this to you, hoping that you could help alleviate the financial obligation of your employee and implement appropriate measures to handle the incident as follows.

While processing payment at the Cashier counter, the customer (picture uploaded herewith) and driver of BMW vehicle SLT6883G, claimed that your pump attendant had mistakenly refilled a full tank of petrol costing about $135 for his vehicle instead of the $10 petrol that he had instructed. He refused to pay the full amount and insisted to pay only $10 for the full tank.

The pump attendant probably in his early 60s, was subsequently summoned to the Cashier counter to verify. He explained that he had heard that it was a full tank refill but the customer immediately rebutted it. What happened next astonished me. Instead of creating a scene by engaging in an argument with the customer, the elderly pump attendant calmly informed the Cashier to let the customer pay $10 and he would personally absorb the rest of the cost. As a result, the customer walked away smugly paying a mere $10 payment for a full tank of petrol for his BMW Series 5 vehicle.

Whilst I was impressed with the collected composure and professional customer service that both your Cashier and pump attendant had displayed throughout the incident, I am deeply disturbed that the customer had capitalized on the opportunity to make the elderly pump attendant pay for the supposedly oversight. The customer could have responded gentlemanly and be gracious to forgive by paying for the petrol since his vehicle would need to consume it anyway. Alternatively, he could have paid for a partial amount instead of making the elderly pump attendant bear the full $125. Unfortunately, this was not so.

I have done some online research and noticed that the remuneration of a pump attendant averages about $1600/mth in Singapore. $125 means a significant 8% of his meagre salary. Would Caltex consider waiving this amount or allowing the pump attendant to pay at cost?

Also, assuming it was entirely the pump attendant’s oversight, under such circumstances, perhaps the Cashier could have proposed to the customer to pay for a partial amount instead of allowing the elderly pump attendant bear full monetary responsibility?

Alternatively, for proof of evidence, perhaps Caltex can install CCTVs equipped with audio recording of drivers’ instructions to the pump attendants at each pump? What are Caltex’s existing guidelines and policies to handle such situation? I am concerned that if no effective standard operating systems are defined, such practices of having pump attendants to bear the price discrepancies can lead to abuse. Imagine if one uses this approach on each petrol station in Singapore every few days, it is tantamount to one walking away striking lottery frequently and the accumulated value will be very substantial!}

*Original post by Ms Kelly Yeo.
I copied the context incase her post got taken down. Please hunt this fucker down!