‘Passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' — Netizens say after passenger scolded driver for driving off despite him waving ‘in front of the bus'
The incident, which took place at night, was captured by the passenger himself: 'I was running towards you for such a long time, and I waved at you for super long,' the passenger insisted, claiming he was right in front of the bus when the bus driver drove off without stopping.
The passenger continued pressing the issue, accusing the driver of ignoring him intentionally. The driver then lost his patience, and his voice went up: 'You listen first! If there is nobody at the bus stop, I won't stop; I will just go!' he retorted. View this post on Instagram
A post shared by SG Daily 🇸🇬 (@thesgdaily)
When the passenger refused to back down, the driver snapped, repeating his question three times before justifying his loss of composure: 'What did you scold me now? What did you scold me now? What did you scold me now? You scold my mother, you know. Who the hell are you, man? You want me to call the police?'
The confrontation quickly escalated into a shouting match, and when the driver, noticing he was being recorded on video via the passenger's mobile phone, appeared to reach for the phone and asked, 'Why you take photo?' 'The passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!'
The video lit up social media, but instead of sympathy for the out-of-breath passenger, most viewers threw their support behind the driver.
'The passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' one commenter wrote. 'He could have missed seeing you. He's driving and must also see who is running in the nighttime?'
Another commenter dropped a truth bomb with comedic flair: 'It's called BUS STOP for a reason, not BUS RUNNING. Come on, bro, everyone must wait for you running, eh?'
Many were quick to remind that bus drivers have schedules to follow — and obligations to everyone onboard.
'If you [run] not at the bus stop, it's not my [business] problem,' one quoted the driver, praising his response. 'He thinks the driver is his personal chauffeur?' another quipped while one more schooled him with: 'Go get your own car or take a cab, lah!' 'Both are wrong!'
A few commenters pointed out that while the commuter was out of line, the driver's reaction could've been more measured.
'Both are wrong!' one commented. 'The passenger is too self-entitled, and the driver's aggressive behaviour is unacceptable. Just a small problem becomes a big problem,' another commented.
Still, others rebutted that the driver only lost his temper after being insulted.
'He wasn't aggressive at first,' someone clarified. 'He got angry because the guy scolded his mother. Anybody would have reacted that way,' another chimed in.
Also, perhaps one of the most pointed comments of all: 'You missed the bus, you just wait la. You miss the flight, you can run after the plane, meh?' Chasing a moving bus from a distance is a gamble
According to SBS Transit and Go-Ahead Singapore's FAQs, bus captains should stop for approaching passengers, but only if they are clearly within the bus stop bay. Once the bus starts to pull away, the driver's attention is on traffic. Chasing a moving bus from a distance is a gamble.
In this case, it remains unclear whether the commuter reached the bus stop in time or was sprinting from afar. What's certain is that he managed to board eventually — and instead of taking the win, chose to confront the driver with a phone in hand and entitlement turned up to the max! Respect goes both ways…
This viral episode isn't just about a missed bus. It's also about public civility, boundaries, and how not to act when things don't go your way.
As one netizen put it for the passenger: 'The bus driver is NOT your personal chauffeur. This is public transport, not a private service.'
And for the driver, another concluded with refreshing clarity: 'There is always a better way to resolve this. When both sides are on fire, look at it objectively.'
If there's one thing this saga taught us, it's that being on time saves more than your seat — it might just save your dignity too.
In other news, in Singapore's ever-evolving saga of ride-hailing dramas, another video surfaced — this time starring a Tada driver vs passenger whose simple request for cooler air ended with a chilling command: 'Get out!'
You can read about their fiery encounter over here: 'Get out! Get out! This is my car, I'm asking you to get out!' — Tada driver ejects passenger for asking to 'increase air-con speed'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
Spotting red flags, taking swift action: Inside DBS' fight against scams
When DBS or POSB customers spot unauthorised transactions in their bank statements, their calls often reach Mr Muhammad Saifuddin, a customer relations and scam management lead at DBS Bank. 'Many victims cling to false hope, believing fraudsters' promises of profitable investments or job payments,' said Mr Muhammad. In 2024, the Singapore Police Force reported 852 love scams, which resulted in S$27.6 million lost. Separately, job and investment scams led to the largest financial losses, amounting to more than S$476 million. Behind these stark figures are individuals whose hard-earned savings were wiped out in an instant. To counter increasingly sophisticated scams, DBS and POSB have implemented a rapid response system that is activated as soon as a customer reports suspicious activity. 'Our teams are trained to act within minutes,' said Mr Muhammad. 'When someone calls our scam hotline, we can immediately lock their accounts and prevent further losses.' Staff like Ms Lee Bee Bee, assistant service manager at the POSB branch in Yishun West, are often the last line of defence against scams. Last year, Ms Lee stopped a customer from falling for a scam. 'The customer believed he was about to receive S$100,000 from an overseas friend,' she said. 'The scammer – posing as a CEO – claimed their own bank account had been frozen, and asked the customer to transfer money to help activate a SIM card.' The request was part of a familiar pattern: Fraudsters often use fake emergencies to build trust and prompt urgent action. Ms Lee persuaded the customer not to proceed with the transfer, pointing out that suspicious web links, requests involving SIM cards and demands for gift card purchases are all common scam tactics. 'When a customer insists on making an urgent overseas transfer, especially for so-called medical bills or to receive valuable items like gold bars, that's an immediate red flag,' said Ms Lee. The warning signs can look different depending on who scammers are targeting – and they are tailoring their tactics to exploit victims of all ages. Job scams target teenagers who are new to the workforce, and individuals aged 20 to 49, who may be looking for a side hustle or seeking extra income. These schemes usually begin on social media, with scammers promising easy money for simple tasks. Telltale signs include payments made by individuals rather than companies, initial contact via social media or messaging apps, and early small payouts designed to build trust before scammers demand larger sums of money. Older Singaporeans are especially vulnerable to love scams, which rely on emotional manipulation. Open conversations with elderly relatives about their online relationships can help family members spot red flags early and allow families to step in before it's too late. WHAT TO DO IF YOU SUSPECT A SCAM If you spot unauthorised transactions, contact the bank immediately. DBS and POSB will activate the Safety Switch, which immediately locks your account and suspends access to online and mobile banking, DBS PayLah!, as well as all physical and digital transactions, including ATM, debit and credit card use. 'This gives customers time to report the scam and protect their remaining funds,' said Mr Muhammad. If your card details are compromised, the bank can help block, cancel and replace the affected card to prevent further misuse. Should you be approached with an offer that seems too good to be true, Mr Muhammad advises seeking a second opinion before acting. 'Consult family members before sending money to strangers, verify suspicious transactions through the bank's scam hotline, and remember – legitimate businesses won't ask for payment in gift cards or cryptocurrency,' he said.
CNA
4 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: Amid Kpod panic, let's not forget ‘regular' vapes are still dangerous
SINGAPORE: In recent months, Kpods - vape devices laced with an anaesthetic called etomidate - have dominated headlines in Singapore and around the world. Many of us have come across stories about teenagers turning into 'zombies' and behaving erratically. Parents have recounted tragic experiences of their children's addiction struggles. There have been calls for stricter regulations around the accessibility of Kpods, especially for young people. This has drawn increased public attention to the dangers of vaping, and rightfully so. But amid this intense focus on Kpods, it's worth considering if something larger is being overlooked. That is, the broader issue of vaping itself, which paved the way for Kpods in the first place. When one product becomes the face of the problem, there's a risk that others fade into the background. It is not hard to imagine how a young person might view Kpods as the extreme, and 'normal' vapes as an acceptable compromise. This division, whether conscious or subconscious, risks blunting the urgency around the vaping epidemic as a whole. STUDENTS USING AND SELLING VAPES Although vaping has always been banned in Singapore, products are still smuggled in. Despite tight border controls and stringent laws, the number of vaping offences has steadily increased. In the first half of 2025, more than 2,500 reports of vaping were made, nearly matching the full-year total of over 3,000 such incidents in 2024. Schools are reporting more students caught with vapes. Some teenagers are now not just users, but also sellers. Just last week (Jul 25), two teenagers approached a Primary 4 student from Fairfield Methodist School as he was walking home from school and tried to get him to buy a vape. In a separate case, a 15-year-old boy who was caught with vapes five times over a 10-month period was recently ordered by a court to be placed in a boys' home. In yet another case, a man was charged in July for manufacturing Kpods at home, the first case of its kind in Singapore. Police found 569 empty pod casings, 1,485 pod covers, 100 loose vape pods and disposable vapes in an HDB flat. The scale of the problem suggests a deeper issue than just breaking the law: Demand is growing, and supply chains are adapting. HEFTIER PENALTIES ARE ONLY PART OF THE SOLUTION Law enforcement has moved quickly. Singapore's plan to list etomidate as a Class C drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act is a necessary step. It gives law enforcement stronger grounds to impose heftier penalties for Kpod offences. But this is a game of whack-a-mole. A major driver of the Kpod scourge is relentless marketing on social media platforms such as Telegram. Vapes are aggressively marketed as trendy, harmless consumer products. While improving drug enforcement laws is important to stay ahead of these schemes, enforcement alone may not be enough. Part of the challenge lies in how vapes are distributed. They are small, easy to hide and hard to trace. Many are distributed through encrypted messaging apps, peer-to-peer networks, and even unwitting parents returning from overseas trips. This is why another layer is needed: One that educates people on the dangers of vaping and helps them take ownership of their well-being. One recent example is the vape bin initiative, which encourages users to surrender their vapes without fear of punishment. The idea is simple: Get harmful devices off the streets and into bins. Critics have asked why a vape user would not just toss the device down the rubbish chute if he or she truly wanted to quit vaping. Whether the vape is thrown into a rubbish chute or a vape bin is not the point. These initiatives are about fostering community cooperation. About telling people that there is no shame in their past actions and offering a public, deliberate first step to quit vaping. But these efforts can only succeed if backed by support structures such as public education, counselling and addiction recovery services. Teens who are vaping to cope with mental health issues, academic stress or social pressure are likely to respond more favourably to counselling and other rehabilitative programmes than the stick. It is worth noting that a similar, albeit smaller, initiative was launched in November 2023 by the MacPherson Youth Network and Bilby Community Development, calling for youths aged 12 to 30 to surrender their vapes to receive a S$30 gift voucher for shops like Decathlon and Sephora. Whether such financial incentives are enough to motivate quitting is unclear. A more effective long-term approach would focus on helping vape-addicted youths address the underlying issues that compel them to vape in the first place. THERE IS NO 'SAFE' VAPE As public discussions on Kpods continue, it is important to remember this: All forms of vaping come with serious health risks. There is no 'safe' vape. The authorities are rightly cracking down on Kpods, but that attention should serve to open up the conversation, not narrow it. Kpods may be the latest concern, but they are part of a much larger and evolving landscape. The more we talk openly about the risks, the more we can prevent harm before it starts.
Independent Singapore
11 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
Maid says, 'My employer attached a tracking device on me to track my whereabouts during my day off'
SINGAPORE: In a now 'self-destructed' post from the Direct Hire Transfer Singapore Maid / Domestic Helper Facebook group, one foreign domestic worker spilled the beans about how her employer doesn't just monitor her work — they apparently monitor her entire existence, even on her day off. 'Every day off, my employer keeps tracking me through my spare key. It got a tracking device connected to her phone,' the maid revealed. Looks like her employer has gone full-blown 'Mission: Impossible' instead of the usual suspicious texts or clingy check-in calls. The spare house key — something meant for emergencies — allegedly came with an attached tracking device that's synced to the employer's phone. The maid didn't say if it beeps when she gets near bubble tea shops or if it vibrates every time she steps into a shopping mall, but the implication was clear: freedom of movement is monitored, and personal time isn't entirely… personal. And it doesn't end there. 'Sometimes when I do marketing, she sets me 1 hour for my market time…' So on top of tracking the maid's whereabouts during her day off, she's also reportedly on a literal kitchen timer when sent out for groceries. Go over the 60-minute mark, and she gets a call from her employer to investigate what her helper is up to. This digital leash is enough to raise eyebrows (and hackles). In recent years, debates over the rights and treatment of domestic workers have only intensified, especially with stories like this shining a light on questionable employer behaviour. While many Singaporean households treat their helpers like extended family, stories like this one remind us that others are, well… treating them like state secrets. Breach of personal privacy While the use of tracking devices on pets and children has grown in popularity (GPS collars and smartwatches), placing one on a domestic helper — especially without consent — enters murky ethical waters. Some would argue it's a breach of personal privacy. Singapore's Ministry of Manpower (MOM) doesn't specifically address GPS tracking of helpers in its employment guidelines, but it does encourage employers to respect their helpers' dignity and rest days. Constant surveillance and rigid time limits probably aren't what MOM had in mind when they promoted open communication and mutual respect in employer-helper relationships. Spy tech can backfire! It's no secret that some employers worry about what their helpers do on their day off — whether it's concerns about safety, social circles, or even moonlighting, but placing a tracker on a human being — without full transparency — is likely to backfire. Many in the group suggested that if safety was genuinely a concern, there were better ways to address it: open conversation, mutual agreements, shared location apps — used with consent. However, in this case, it seems the employer skipped the chat and went straight for spy tech. Group members collectively state that: 'This kind of behaviour gives good employers a bad name. Most helpers already live where they work. They deserve trust and autonomy, especially on their day off. Tracking them like this is just not okay.' Humanity must come first It's unclear why the post was deleted. Perhaps the maid feared retaliation from group members or even from her spying employer. Maybe someone advised her to take it down to avoid conflict, or perhaps the tracker started buzzing suspiciously as she typed. Whatever the reason, the conversation it sparked isn't going away anytime soon. Because at the heart of it is a bigger question: How far is too far when it comes to managing domestic helpers? Singapore prides itself on efficiency and order, but even in the most efficient systems, humanity must come first. After all, trust can't be installed with a tracking chip. In other news, another Maid asks, 'Dear employer, how do you just lie on the sofa every day holding your mobile phone? Do you realize that servants are also human and feel tired?' Let's just hope this maid's employer isn't tracking her helper, too.
