Employment - resume - lying about exams?

[Gagan]

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks

[DW Simpson]

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks

Yeah, there's really a problem with this and I hope they get nailed.

If you can't tell the truth at this stage of your career, don't enter this industry.

[glassjaws]

You don't get the result right away, do you? Isn't it a preliminary pass; i.e. not guaranteed to be a pass? Also, they can look and see if you are on a passing list for a sitting and if you're not, you could be in some hot water. Plus at the intern level, they aren't investing as much in you and can fire you on the spot with little real impact to their operations.

[Barney Fife]

That is IDIOTIC.

[DudeMan]

It's not lying if they don't get caught. An employer can verify by checking the corresponding pass list on the SOA/CAS website. The risk the candidate takes is whether or not the employer chooses to do this. Personally, I'm too risk adverse for such practice. Others may feel different.

[vividox]

This is more than just ethically wrong, it is business suicide. If you provide false professional qualifications and get caught you are shooting yourself in the foot hard core. Talk about burning some serious bridges.

Every place I've ever applied to has come back requesting documentation of said qualifications, I don't suspect this kind of an act to go unnoticed.

The other thing is, it is perfectly fine to say something on your resume to the effect of "Taking FM in May" or "Awaiting results of November FM testing". This not only tells them you are pushing forward with testing, but isn't lying.

Seriously. Don't lie on your resume.

[JMO]

It's not lying if they don't get caught.

That is IDIOTIC.

Another case where the correct answer preceded the post it could have replied to.

[Gagan]

Yeah that's exactly what I thought. I'm in the same boat as those students (passed FM but not P) but I have "taking P in march" for instance on my resume instead of "passed P" or something like that.

As much as it sucks having one exam+taking another in your resume amidst a pile of 2+ exam resumes for a coop position, I guess it's not worth it to lie.

Thanks for the responses.

[JMO]

Seriously. Don't lie on your resume.

I think I've heard this advice somewhere before. :popcorn:

[tommie frazier]

i used to check for passing names-which are public. I would ask someone when they passed it. (I don't care how many times they took it-just when they passed it)

so, this person would not really make it through my screen all that well.

[UFCindy03]

Don't lie on your resume.

I agree. The actuary community tends to be very small, so dont get people talking about you in a negative way at the beginning. I'm not a hiring manager, but it would take me 15 minutes to verify this. Or, they can ask you for a transcript after they have hired you. (My present employer asked for during week 2.)

[atomic]

It's not lying if they don't get caught. An employer can verify by checking the corresponding pass list on the SOA/CAS website. The risk the candidate takes is whether or not the employer chooses to do this. Personally, I'm too risk averse for such practice. Others may feel different.

IFYP

And it is lying, because they are misrepresenting their exam progress. Not getting caught for a lie doesn't automatically make it the truth.

OTOH, you could say they are simply projecting to ultimate. :crazy:

[JohnLocke]

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks

I hope they get caught and boiled. I've always (naively?) viewed this as a profession with integrity (or at least honesty). Anyone caught lying about exams should be barred from credentials. IMO.

[banpeikun]

Your resume is on permanent record with the company. Remember that also.

[DudeMan]

Another case where the correct answer preceded the post it could have replied to.

How often do people lie?
What percent of the lies get caught?
What percent of the catches result in severe consequence?

Lying, cheating, and stealing payoff more often than not. I'm just pointing out that some people think it is worth the risk in order to gain an advantage; others don't. Like I said, I (like most actuary's) am too risk averse to try something of that nature. Others feel differently.

[DudeMan]

I agree. The actuary community tends to be very small, so dont get people talking about you in a negative way at the beginning.

This is probably my #2 reason for not doing it. (#1 being morals)

[eagles418]

Absolutely retarded.. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bending the rules, but saying you passed more exams then you truthfully have is absolutely retarded. Lets say the company hired you. Do you really think they're going to take your word and just attach the P and FM bonuses to your starting salary? I would like to think that HR has enough sense to verify something as important as actuarial credentials. If not, then I'm telling HR that I'm an FSA. HAHA

[bertuary]

The four companies I've worked at over the years have all verified exam progress as part of the background check. This goes for interns too. So not a very good idea in my opinion. If they apply here, it'll get caught and we will keep their name in a "never to hire" category. It's a really short sighted and stupid choice.

[kan03c]

Massively retarded. The words douchy and immature also come to mind.

[ElDucky]

If you are taking P, har har, as an intern that is worth almost as much as having passed it. I did check the exams of the last intern hired.

Lying about an exam is worse than lying about living in New York.

[JohnLocke]

Who lies about living in NY?

[ElDucky]

Petertang. The most recent thread I recall about lying on a resume.

[MountainHawk]

This is foolish. The date you pass an exam is public knowledge. Good way to kill your actuarial career from the start.

BTW, the Actuarial Code of Conduct applies to students as well ... this could easy cause them to be suspended from taking any exams for a period of time, if they did it to the wrong actuary who wanted to make a point.

[Sleepy Head]

Anyone caught lying about exams should be barred from credentials. IMO.

ITA.

[EaglesFan]

I agree with all of the above. I would really hope that the interviewers/recruiters would check, however as much as I hate to say it, I think a fair number may get away with it especially if it's just a summer job.

I've been amazed by how uninformed some of the HR people are. After I had passed Exam P, a recruiter I met at a fair told me that the exam was irrelevant to them because they were a P&C company. I tried to find the nicest way (including phrases such as "I believe" and "I think") that this exam was identical for both societies. She still didn't seem to believe me but said she would take my resume anyway if I really wanted her to. And that's just one story....

[Will_Hunting]

They just passed the "candidate code of conduct" for this exact reason

[Gagan]

hmm

but what if you say you passed P, ex. today is Feb 25, and you're taking P March 12th. So you apply for a bunch of jobs and on your resume you stated that you passed P. Come march 12th you DO pass P and get an unofficial pass (which pretty much is a guarantee that you did pass). So now you're not really lying right?

Because most times it takes the companies a while to go through the resumes and interview people, by putting not putting down that you've passed P on the resume you submitted on Feb 25th, you're essentially putting yourself at a disadvantage and quite possibly lose the opportunity for an interview or even a potential hire if the issue with exams passed was a big deal to the employer.
If you would've passed P by March 12th you might as well put that down then? Is this still that bad?

What do you guys think of this from this POV? Of course this means you pretty much HAVE to ensure that you DO pass.

[ElDucky]

I can still tell when you passed and know I got the resume before that. By your logic, anything I believe will happen soon, I can say as true. Therefore, I am the 5th head on Mt. Rushmore.

Plus what happens when you don't pass? Just mention that you are taking the exam. If the interview is after the exam, you will be asked then how it went.

[Darkness Falls]

hmm

but what if you say you passed P, ex. today is Feb 25, and you're taking P March 12th. So you apply for a bunch of jobs and on your resume you stated that you passed P. Come march 12th you DO pass P and get an unofficial pass (which pretty much is a guarantee that you did pass). So now you're not really lying right?

Because most times it takes the companies a while to go through the resumes and interview people, by putting not putting down that you've passed P on the resume you submitted on Feb 25th, you're essentially putting yourself at a disadvantage and quite possibly lose the opportunity for an interview or even a potential hire if the issue with exams passed was a big deal to the employer.
If you would've passed P by March 12th you might as well put that down then? Is this still that bad?

What do you guys think of this from this POV? Of course this means you pretty much HAVE to ensure that you DO pass.

Notwithstanding the ethical issues you bring up. A negative character trait that will come back to haunt you one day if you do not deal with it.

There is no way to guarantee a pass. What will you do if you fail? Another problem, is what happens if they ask how P went during the interview and you mention the date you took it, which would be after they received it. A lot of CV have the date received/processed "stamped" onto them and if yours if before you hope to pass you're in for a lot of trouble!

[Darkness Falls]

Just mention that you are taking the exam. If the interview is after the exam, you will be asked then how it went.

:iatp:

[The Half]

Let's take it a step further, if I was in the OPs position, I would have a hard time not submitting their names. This is one of the more ridiculous things I've read about on the AO. The dates of when something is or isn't going to happen is irrelevant, if you haven't passed when you draft your resume, and you put that you have passed, its lying, its unethical, period.

[KingWithoutACrown]

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks

If you are asking if there is a problem with being morally and ethically wrong then I feel sorry for you dawg. As for the other students doing this, stay away from the herd. ya heard :rimshot:

[brianbogey]

I spoke to a recruiter from a very well-known healthcare company last year. He/she stated that they had recently caught 2 prospective new hires who had "mis-stated" the number of exams passed on their resume. They were not hired. Its nice to see justice served up cold & on a plate.

[ElDucky]

Next thread will be 'Is it ok to say I've passed 4 exams, even though they aren't actuarial exams? I didn't say which ones, I just said 4 exams, so it's not a lie. Duuuurrrrrr'.

[Roy Hobbs]

If I get a resume and am planning on interviewing someone I will always check to see if they actually passed the exams they said they did. It takes 5 minutes.

If I couldn't confirm it on my own it would be one of the first questions I would ask them (i.e., when did you pass x exam?). If I found out they were lying I would make the rest of the interview as uncomfortable as possible, rip up their resume right there, tell all my friends at all the other firms in town not to hire them (the actuarial world isn't that big in most cities), and then report them to the SOA as I am bound to do by the Code of Conduct.

Even without all that, what happens if you do get hired then find out you didn't pass? Then you're done for good.

[Sarengo]

Wow, just wow. I didn't realize the actuarial industry in Canada was so cutthroat that it warrants lying to a potential employer, risking your professional reputation, and breaking the actuarial student code of conduct. Seriously, this is the kind of stuff that makes the SOA have to run marketing campaigns talking about our "special talents." I can see it now, 'So some candidates may lie on their resumes, but the skills gained by passing whatever exams they actually passed make up for the investment you put in them.'

[ElDucky]

To be fair, it seems that no one doing this is actually getting a job, so there may be no actuaries who have done this, as anyone who did this is no longer an actuary. Anyway, to the OP, stop asking for ways that this might be ok. It isn't. The end.

[Roy Hobbs]

To be fair, it seems that no one doing this is actually getting a job, so there may be no actuaries who have done this, as anyone who did this is no longer an actuary. Anyway, to the OP, stop asking for ways that this might be ok. It isn't. The end.

My fave was the OP trying to justify that it might be ok as its just a summer co op and not a full time position. Why not just say you are an FSA, it's just a co op!

[GooseyGoose]

First off, you guys got trolled.

Secondly, this idea isn't all doom and gloom like all the goodies here would lead you to believe.

1. Not everyone checks your exams. Nobody checked mine.
2. Your name isn't going to be on any list for a preliminary pass anyway.
3. Make sure you schedule the interview for after your test. If you pass, show up and all is good. If you don't pass, just skip out on the interview. Nobody is going to dig into your personal exam history if you aren't even a potential candidate anymore.
4. And give me a break about all these time stamp theories. All I ever hear is people bit**ing they have to sift through 100's of resumes. Honestly, you think after finally dwindiling it down to 10 resumes, they are going to go back and check the time stamps?

[abwoc]

I've been amazed by how uninformed some of the HR people are. After I had passed Exam P, a recruiter I met at a fair told me that the exam was irrelevant to them because they were a P&C company.

At this point, you should have said, "Oh! Well, I've also passed CAS exam 1!"

[Darkness Falls]

First off, you guys got trolled.

Secondly, this idea isn't all doom and gloom like all the goodies here would lead you to believe.

1. Not everyone checks your exams. Nobody checked mine.
2. Your name isn't going to be on any list for a preliminary pass anyway.
3. Make sure you schedule the interview for after your test. If you pass, show up and all is good. If you don't pass, just skip out on the interview. Nobody is going to dig into your personal exam history if you aren't even a potential candidate anymore.
4. And give me a break about all these time stamp theories. All I ever hear is people bit**ing they have to sift through 100's of resumes. Honestly, you think after finally dwindiling it down to 10 resumes, they are going to go back and check the time stamps?

How can you be so sure of that. You don't think someone quickly checked the pass lists to make sure your name was there.

[DudeMan]

First off, you guys got trolled.

Secondly, this idea isn't all doom and gloom like all the goodies here would lead you to believe.

1. Not everyone checks your exams. Nobody checked mine.
2. Your name isn't going to be on any list for a preliminary pass anyway.
3. Make sure you schedule the interview for after your test. If you pass, show up and all is good. If you don't pass, just skip out on the interview. Nobody is going to dig into your personal exam history if you aren't even a potential candidate anymore.
4. And give me a break about all these time stamp theories. All I ever hear is people bit**ing they have to sift through 100's of resumes. Honestly, you think after finally dwindiling it down to 10 resumes, they are going to go back and check the time stamps?

finally someone who can think outside the box.

[DudeMan]

How can you be so sure of that. You don't think someone quickly checked the pass lists to make sure your name was there.

Your resume must first pass through HR. HR certainly isn't going to do this research. Then your resume is passed to an Actuarial Manager. Manager then schedules phone interviews with all candidates. Manager then picks a handful of candidates for possible in-person interview. This is the first point I can see any kind of exam verification occurring.

[Darkness Falls]

Your resume must first pass through HR. HR certainly isn't going to do this research. Then your resume is passed to an Actuarial Manager. Manager then schedules phone interviews with all candidates. Manager then picks a handful of candidates for possible in-person interview. This is the first point I can see any kind of exam verification occurring.

I agree with you. However, since the whole point is to get the resume to an actuarial manager, do you really want to risk everything on an exam lie.

[DudeMan]

I agree with you. However, since the whole point is to get the resume to an actuarial manager, do you really want to risk everything on an exam lie.

The only major risk I see is if the candidate ends up not passing the exam. In that case, like Goose says, just duck out of the phone interview.

Edit: maybe also a small risk that your resume has unusually short queue time in HR. Resume says you passed exam on March 20th, and manager reads your resume on March 13th

[Darkness Falls]

The only major risk I see is if the candidate ends up not passing the exam. In that case, like Goose says, just duck out of the phone interview.

What about a simple case: deadline for applying for a job is March 13th & exam week for P is March 16th to 20th. The person passes the exam, but it gets brought up during the interview with a question asking when they wrote P. Unless they lie again there, it'll come out that the exam was passed after the job application deadline. Have fun explaining that!!!

[DudeMan]

What about a simple case: deadline for applying for a job is March 13th & exam week for P is March 16th to 20th. The person passes the exam, but it gets brought up during the interview with a question asking when they wrote P. Unless they lie again there, it'll come out that the exam was passed after the job application deadline. Have fun explaining that!!!

HR deadline is March 13th. Then HR has organize resumes, develop criteria to weed the pool down to a certain number, then go through them all. That process doesn't happen over night. By the time an actuarial manager even looks at your resume, it could be a few weeks.

[Darkness Falls]

HR deadline is March 13th. Then HR has organize resumes, develop criteria to weed the pool down to a certain number, then go through them all. That process doesn't happen over night. By the time an actuarial manager even looks at your resume, it could be a few weeks.

That doesn't nullify the fact that if the actuary brings up the exam in the interview and knows when the deadline for applying was, they will notice the problem.

[Klaymen]

Even if, in a little while, a successful exam pass shows up on the internet, aren't you running major risk that either 1) the company checks the information and finds out you are lying, or 2) somebody realizes after the fact that, based on when exam results are available, there is no way you could have known this when you submitted your resume.

It isn't worth lying about. Tell them you are very hopeful about it, maybe even work a salary adjustment into the negotiation if you pass (do they do this) but if you aren't going to have some integrity you are in the wrong profession.

[DudeMan]

That doesn't nullify the fact that if the actuary brings up the exam in the interview and knows when the deadline for applying was, they will notice the problem.

You're right, it doesn't nullify the fact. But you're assuming a few things: (1) interviewer knows the exact application deadline; (2) interviewer knows the exact day of the exam/results; (3) interviewer notices the mismatch; (4) interviewer cares given the interviewee has an accurate transcript.

[JMO]

The only major risk I see is if the candidate ends up not passing the exam. In that case, like Goose says, just duck out of the phone interview.

Edit: maybe also a small risk that your resume has unusually short queue time in HR. Resume says you passed exam on March 20th, and manager reads your resume on March 13th

If the candidate is a troll, will the interviewer be able to figure that out? :judge:

[Dr T Non-Fan]

Meh.

1. Estimate the probability of passing each exam at some point in the future.
2. Determine the present value by discounting those numbers of exams passed.
3. Sum the Present values to determine the present value of the number of future exams passed.

At least, document your lie with actuarial assumptions.

[Darkness Falls]

You're right, it doesn't nullify the fact. But you're assuming a few things: (1) interviewer knows the exact application deadline; (2) interviewer knows the exact day of the exam/results; (3) interviewer notices the mismatch; (4) interviewer cares given the interviewee has an accurate transcript.

Sure 1-2 are not certain, but if they are true #3 should hopefully follow. As for #4, I sure hope so, if you were interviewing someone in this situation and noticed it wouldn't you care?

Also all it takes is 1 interviewer to notice the problem for a lot of trouble to happen. As has been said here many times, the actuarial world is pretty small. One person could effectively "blacklist" this candidate by letting other actuaries + CAS/SOA about them. I sure would!!!

Anyways the fact is the potential job is not worth the risk of ruining ones career before it even really starts.

[Darkness Falls]

Meh.

1. Estimate the probability of passing each exam at some point in the future.
2. Determine the present value by discounting those numbers of exams passed.
3. Sum the Present values to determine the present value of the number of future exams passed.

At least, document your lie with actuarial assumptions.

:rofl:

[DudeMan]

Even if, in a little while, a successful exam pass shows up on the internet, aren't you running major risk that either 1) the company checks the information and finds out you are lying, or 2) somebody realizes after the fact that, based on when exam results are available, there is no way you could have known this when you submitted your resume.


Yeah this is a risk. The candidate is gambling that the interviewer(s) won't analyze the resume like a actuaryhawk.

If the candidate is a troll, will the interviewer be able to figure that out? :judge:

Some candidates include a section on their resume for affiliations. I suppose if the candidate announced their AO affiliation as the poster JMO :pity:, the interviewer can easily figure it out.

[Passacaglia]

If I get a resume and am planning on interviewing someone I will always check to see if they actually passed the exams they said they did. It takes 5 minutes.

If I couldn't confirm it on my own it would be one of the first questions I would ask them (i.e., when did you pass x exam?). If I found out they were lying I would make the rest of the interview as uncomfortable as possible, rip up their resume right there, tell all my friends at all the other firms in town not to hire them (the actuarial world isn't that big in most cities), and then report them to the SOA as I am bound to do by the Code of Conduct.

Even without all that, what happens if you do get hired then find out you didn't pass? Then you're done for good.

How are you going to tell your friends at other firms who he is, if you've ripped up the resume? :dsmile:

Anyway, to the OP, if you're feeling like you're getting cheated by others lying about this, think of the opportunity they're missing out on -- when you DO pass the exam, that gives you a reason to contact the same employers personally to let them know you passed, and send them an updated resume!

[Darkness Falls]

[hypothetical situation]

Another solution, though ethically dubious, is to e-mail actuaries at all the companies in the area the list of people who are lying about P. Getting a list like that should be enough to get them to double check.

Of course that probably brings up the risk of libel. But that's what technology and anonymous e-mails are useful for.

[/hypothetical situation]

[Dr T Non-Fan]

:rofl:
Happy to help brighten up your day!

[Roy Hobbs]

You're right, it doesn't nullify the fact. But you're assuming a few things: (1) interviewer knows the exact application deadline; (2) interviewer knows the exact day of the exam/results; (3) interviewer notices the mismatch; (4) interviewer cares given the interviewee has an accurate transcript.

You're forgetting the fact that most actuarial students are anal, like to look up s on the net instead of working and would love to bust someones balls.

Someone in the interview process is going to find out, might not be the big wig, but one of the students in the interview list could just as easily bust you.

[twig93]

It's not lying if they don't get caught.

:shake:

They won't get fired if they don't get caught, but it's still lying.

[twig93]

I agree. The actuary community tends to be very small, so dont get people talking about you in a negative way at the beginning. I'm not a hiring manager, but it would take me 15 minutes to verify this. Or, they can ask you for a transcript after they have hired you. (My present employer asked for during week 2.)

15 minutes? I could verify it in under 5.

[twig93]

You're right, it doesn't nullify the fact. But you're assuming a few things: (1) interviewer knows the exact application deadline; (2) interviewer knows the exact day of the exam/results; (3) interviewer notices the mismatch; (4) interviewer cares given the interviewee has an accurate transcript.

I don't know about what actuaries do at other companies, but a significant part of our work here where I work is data reconciliation. It's pretty trivial to see that the dates don't tie out, particularly when HR has helpfully stamped that they received the resume on March 13 and the passing candidates list for the March 16-20 sitting came out on March 30.

If you got the preliminary pass from the computer, I think it's fine at that point to put that you'd passed the exam. But if you haven't even sat yet... that's very black and white: don't do it. If the deadline is March 13 and you're sitting March 16, just say so on the resume and mention in the cover letter that you feel very confident about the exam if you feel so inclined.

I think you'd have an easier time convincing a hiring manager that Exam P is actually the life contingencies exam than you would convincing the manager that you'd passed it when you hadn't.

[DudeMan]

......the fact that most actuarial students are anal......

what makes you think that?

[Maine-iac]

This is not the right profession for "flexible ethics". I would not hire any potential actuary if I found that they lied on their resume, including post-dating of exams. I wouldn't hire anyone who cheated in college either, if I had any way to find out about it.

[ElDucky]

what makes you think that?

:wave:

[Loner]

Aside from it being simply wrong, it's impractical. The bump in salary from passing an exam is typically greater than the difference in entry-level salaries for different exam levels. When I started with one exam and passed my second, I passed a coworker who had started at the same time as me with two in salary. And we had someone else who had accepted an offer, started before results came in for an exam he took before starting, and got the full raise upon getting his grade report.

[Sleepy Head]

1. Not everyone checks your exams. Nobody checked mine.


You know, I didn't check before because I tend to trust actuaries/future actuaries' honesty and integrity. But after reading this thread, I assure you that I'll check each resume carefully from now on. I don't care much if you have one more or one fewer exam, but I care if you lie. If I can't trust you to be truthful on simple matters like correctly reporting your exam progress, I can't trust you at all.

[Gagan]

First off, you guys got trolled.

Secondly, this idea isn't all doom and gloom like all the goodies here would lead you to believe.

1. Not everyone checks your exams. Nobody checked mine.
2. Your name isn't going to be on any list for a preliminary pass anyway.
3. Make sure you schedule the interview for after your test. If you pass, show up and all is good. If you don't pass, just skip out on the interview. Nobody is going to dig into your personal exam history if you aren't even a potential candidate anymore.
4. And give me a break about all these time stamp theories. All I ever hear is people bit**ing they have to sift through 100's of resumes. Honestly, you think after finally dwindiling it down to 10 resumes, they are going to go back and check the time stamps?

Thanks for the response, although I don't get what you mean about these people here getting trolled?

How is my post a troll post?

I'm not trying to justify anything don't get me wrong. As I mentioned in the first post, the reason these students are doing it at my school is because ideally if/when they do get the interview, they will have passed P by then (could be weeks after they passed P for instance) and it seemed like they were doing this because if you didn't you would be at a huge disadvantage compared to other students who did pass P.

Since nobody initially addressed this point in their response, I elaborated further with the "reason" or justification of why one would do this. One as in the students at my school, not me. Oh btw when I said the students it was really like 3-4.

Thanks for your response though. I was just curious as the likelihood of getting found out if one did this because under normal circumstances, with the huge stack of resumes they get, lengthy screening process, deciding on interviews, etc. it could take weeks or months before the candidate gets the interview. It seemed that if one were to do this little 'lie' but passed anyway, it wouldn't be a big deal. More like a slight 'bending' of the rules.

That's all I was asking. I know it's career suicide if you lie lol.

[Gagan]

You know, I didn't check before because I tend to trust actuaries/future actuaries' honesty and integrity. But after reading this thread, I assure you that I'll check each resume carefully from now on. I don't care much if you have one more or one fewer exam, but I care if you lie. If I can't trust you to be truthful on simple matters like correctly reporting your exam progress, I can't trust you at all.

this is what I mean, I was under the impression that they just 'trust' you and simply ask if you've passed. (Referring to interview process etc.) Once you get hired, you'll have passed anyway and basically you're safe so to speak.

That was what the students who were doing this were thinking and I can perfectly see why they would think that. It really is like a bending of the rules.

I just wanted to ask because it seemed relatively harmless if you did indeed pass 3 days after submitting resume for instance. The idea of them noticing the discrepancy in the dates is quite farfetched to me given that I'm sure there are 100s of resumes to deal with and it could be weeks or months down the road before you get interviewed.

If this thread did indeed get some of you employers to double check resumes carefully, then that's a GOOD thing. Not a bad thing. And I am perfectly happy with bringing that to your attention.

[Wigmeister General]

Eventually, all of the facts will come out after you're hired. Yes, we take you on face value. Yes, we obtain proof that you've graduated from college -- even if it takes 2 months to get a copy of an official transcript.

G-d help you if you didn't graduate.

Likewise, G-d help you if you lied about your exam progress.

[Froggy101]

it seemed like they were doing this because if you didn't you would be at a huge disadvantage compared to other students who did pass P.




They should be at a disadvantage because they have few exams. What is wrong with that?

[Gagan]

Nope you're absolutely right about that.

[CedarTree]

Thanks for the response, although I don't get what you mean about these people here getting trolled?

How is my post a troll post?

I'm not trying to justify anything don't get me wrong. As I mentioned in the first post, the reason these students are doing it at my school is because ideally if/when they do get the interview, they will have passed P by then (could be weeks after they passed P for instance) and it seemed like they were doing this because if you didn't you would be at a huge disadvantage compared to other students who did pass P.


Dear Mr. Recruiter Man,

I sent you my resume a few weeks ago. Attached is an updated version reflecting that I passed Exam P on March X and will be sitting for MLC in May (or Nov.). I still have great interest in any opportunities at ______. I hope to hear from you.

Thanks,
Honest Student

[CedarTree]

Two other things,

P[Pass any Act. Exam] < 1; there's no "will have passed", only "may have passed"

I don't know the likelyhood that they'll be caught but the possible outcomes of getting an internship versus ruining you career make them very stupid no matter what.

[Lucy]

this is what I mean, I was under the impression that they just 'trust' you and simply ask if you've passed. (Referring to interview process etc.) Once you get hired, you'll have passed anyway and basically you're safe so to speak.No, most of my employers (including my current one) do a background check, and stuff like that can surface during the hiring process or after the the offer is made or even after you've been hired. At a past employer HR told my boss that I'd lied about my wages on a part-time college job two months after I was hired. (I had to give HR that information on my first day of work, I had no idea what I'd earned, and I tried to leave it blank, but some idiot in HR insisted I had to fill in something, and I was dumb enough to do as she told me. Fortunately, my boss didn't care what I'd been paid at that job, and perhaps had seen similar problems due to the way HR handled that aspect.)

That was what the students who were doing this were thinking and I can perfectly see why they would think that. It really is like a bending of the rules.

I just wanted to ask because it seemed relatively harmless if you did indeed pass 3 days after submitting resume for instance. The idea of them noticing the discrepancy in the dates is quite farfetched to me given that I'm sure there are 100s of resumes to deal with and it could be weeks or months down the road before you get interviewed.But if you make it as far as an interview, there aren't hundreds any more, and it becomes worth checking up on these things. My wage as a grader in college was completely irrelevant to my qualifications for the job. Whether you've passed an exam is very relevant. If you got caught in this lie, you would certainly be fired, and probably blackballed. I'm sure some companies wouldn't notice, but I'm also sure that some would.

There've been a bunch of questions on this board about whether it's justified to lie on your application in one way or another, but this takes the cake as the stupidest of them.

[JohnLocke]

There've been a bunch of questions on this board about whether it's justified to lie on your application in one way or another, but this takes the cake as the stupidest of them.

I like cake.

[vividox]

Dear Mr. Recruiter Man,

I sent you my resume a few weeks ago. Attached is an updated version reflecting that I passed Exam P on March X and will be sitting for MLC in May (or Nov.). I still have great interest in any opportunities at ______. I hope to hear from you.

Thanks,
Honest Student

:iatp: x 42

[MountainHawk]

I just don't get it. Honestly, if you get caught doing this and called out for it, your actuarial career is essentially over before it starts. It would seem to be the Risk/reward ratio here is really large.

[CantGoogleMe]

Two other things,

P[Pass any Act. Exam] < 1; there's no "will have passed", only "may have passed"

I don't know the likelyhood that they'll be caught but the possible outcomes of getting an internship versus ruining you career make them very stupid no matter what.

Wouldn't that be:

P[Pass any Act. Exam] <= 1 ??

[vividox]

P[Pass any Act. Exam] <= 1 ??

Only if someone was guaranteed to never fail the test when they took it. Which I would say is an improbability.

[Omikron]

It's not lying if they don't get caught.

There is always someone there to watch you lie and you'll have to live with that person for the rest of your life. And they'll constantly remind you of what you've done.

[Werewolf]

I did a background check and discovered that you embellished your resume. For example, there's no college named "The Einstein One." And I'm reasonably certain "Smartology" isn't a real major.

[DudeMan]

There is always someone there to watch you lie and you'll have to live with that person for the rest of your life. And they'll constantly remind you of what you've done.

:pokeystick: Not everyone has the same ethical standards.

[J.T.]

Dear Mr. Recruiter Man,

I sent you my resume a few weeks ago. Attached is an updated version reflecting that I passed Exam P on March X and will be sitting for MLC in May (or Nov.). I still have great interest in any opportunities at ______. I hope to hear from you.

Thanks,
Honest Student

:iatp: too.

There's no call here. That's the policy you follow, and if anyone does differently, I don't want to work with your or have you call yourself an actuary.

[unnamed]

I know a friend of mine, a lady, who puts on her resume 'passed MLC' before the result was published. Of course this shows her confidence of passing MLC, which she did; but I think no matter how confident you are, a lie is still a lie.

[MooBeay]

:pokeystick: Not everyone has the same ethical standards.

"I'll take business ethics" - Billy Madison

[Gagan]

There's no call here. That's the policy you follow, and if anyone does differently, I don't want to work with your or have you call yourself an actuary.

Well what about when the test centre has technical difficulties and you are unable to take your exam during the testing window? (Happened to me).

Then you have to wait another 2 months (and pay another 175 USD because in my case they refuse to refund the exam fee). Stuff like this sure makes one want to bend the rules...

I'm not saying one should, but most of you are oversimplifying things. Everybody bends the rules. It's a part of life. Most of the time you don't get caught and it comes to your advantage. I'm pretty sure there's a + Expected value from this. As someone else has mentioned, if one didn't pass, one would just skip out on the interview....

I'm just saying....to go as far as saying 'don't call yourself an actuary' or words to that effect is almost hypocritical. No offense to anyone, but I'm hoping you will see my point. Remember, the ORIGINAL post was not about lying your exams and then work full time at a company hoping they won't find out....that's NOT what the original post was about. It's about saying you passed the exam if the deadline for the job application is coming up and say your exam date is a week after for instance. If you pass, then (this is what the original post was asking) is there any consequences? Doesn't seem like that bad given how it could be months before the company even sees your resume, the chances of them noticing any discrepancy is low (again this was part of the original question). IF you fail, then whatever happens, just skip out if you get an interview.

Why some of you fail to address this original post and simply go forward with "thats stupid, if you get caught your career is over".

Who dares to say they never speed? Never steal? Never bend the rules? Given the above scenario, wouldn't this have a positive expected value seeing as you pretty much can't lose? As an actuary it's almost like you're "dumb" if you don't do this.

Again, not saying I will do it but seriously, I don't get why some people can't properly address the issue brought up in the original post.

PS. I 100% guarantee most of you guys have bent the rules in some way or another. I bet some of you have even lied about your exams (same scenario brought up in original post) in hopes of passing it right after sending in the resume. Of course you guys will never admit it....

[The Half]

from your other posts, i wouldn't consider a daylight savings time mishap a techincal difficulty. more like user error. there's never going to be a good reason. get over it.

[Gagan]

from your other posts, i wouldn't consider a daylight savings time mishap a techincal difficulty. more like user error. there's never going to be a good reason. get over it.

no, the test site was DOWN for an entire week (I don't know about now).
When I went, there were many candidates there, many were from out of town. You can imagine how they must have felt after being given a ticket number and told to call in to reschedule.

I know my previous post might rub some people the wrong way but hey I'm just being honest. Some of the responses don't address the original post. They are simply "no its stupid dont call urself an actuary" or words along those lines. Someone even responded by saying how after working for a company for some time of course they're gonna check up on you. I mean duh, that's not what the original post was about. It's about the small discrepancy between applying by a certain deadline and passing P just after the deadline.

[p51dray]

Gagan stop trying to rationalize this. Even though someone did it in the past doesn't justify you from doing it. When you say you passed an exam but at the time you submitted your resume you haven't, you lied. I don't get why is this concept so difficult; plenty of people have addressed this already.

We ALL worked hard for our career. If you can't deal with setbacks properly then maybe you should go into something else.

btw try asking Parker about this and see what sort of lecture you'll get. I dare you.

[SooMe]

Agreed. OP, I was in your situation, and sat and wrote 3 exams (and passed) between the application deadline and the start of the job. I didn't end up applying, because at the time, I didn't pass a god damn thing. A classmate of mine did get a job however (only having passed 1 exam by the deadline), because he had passed before the application deadline. If chumps like you think it's alright to go ahead and lie on your resume, then you've got a lot of balls. And to that end, I hope you lose one in a hunting accident.

[neofan]

Gagan stop trying to rationalize this. Even though someone did it in the past doesn't justify you from doing it. When you say you passed an exam but at the time you submitted your resume you haven't, you lied. I don't get why is this concept so difficult; plenty of people have addressed this already.

We ALL worked hard for our career. If you can't deal with setbacks properly then maybe you should go into something else.

btw try asking Parker about this and see what sort of lecture you'll get. I dare you.

Also for Gagan, if you call this a setback, what would you call it for sending out 1000+ resumes, hundreds of rejections from telephone interviews, 11 on-site interviews before getting the first offer, failing exams a few times, 3+ years of diligent job search before landing my first actuarial job? That was me, what have I learned from this? To get a good job/career, you simply have to work for it. I don't want to sound negative, but lately this board has become whiners' paradise.

[Gagan]

If chumps like you think it's alright to go ahead and lie on your resume, then you've got a lot of balls. And to that end, I hope you lose one in a hunting accident.

See this is what I mean. Can people not read? If you can't comprehend the scenario that was presented in the original post (and my last post) then seriously don't reply. It's not a case of "lying" on the resume. You're using the word "lie" as if the person is boldly saying they passed 3 exams even when they really only passed 1 and it would be OBVIOUS and easy for the company to find out.

I'm not saying this is right. I'm saying stop treating it as if someone is flat out lying about being an ASA or whatever or somethign ridiculous like that. If you can understand the scenario that was presented, you'll see it's different. If you are able to pass 1 week after your resume submission, some might say you're a fool if you don't bend the truth a little to gain an edge. If you can't understand that then please don't bother replying. This isn't about flat out lying and making up crap on the resume. You'll see that this is different.



Also for Gagan, if you call this a setback, what would you call it for sending out 1000+ resumes, hundreds of rejections from telephone interviews, 11 on-site interviews before getting the first offer, failing exams a few times, 3+ years of diligent job search before landing my first actuarial job? That was me, what have I learned from this? To get a good job/career, you simply have to work for it. I don't want to sound negative, but lately this board has become whiners' paradise.

Yes it is a setback. How can it not be? The setback isn't as bad as yours but it's still considered a setback, no?

For the record (in case some people can't read), I don't plan on lying on my resume in any way. NEVER have.
I'm just sick and tired of people who can't read and instead of understanding the scenario which was more like 'bending the rules', they treat it as if it's about people making OBVIOUS lies on the resumes (like saying you passed 3 exams when you only passed 1 and then not bothering to pass the others and just hope to 'sneak by' and get hired). That's totally different.

Also, this is a forum. Whining or not, at least it creates discussion (or flaming). I try not to be 'whiny'. In my other topic I was merely stating the situation and asking for advice on how to get through the setback. In this post, I'm just tired of people not understanding what the original post was about. What's worse is most people who responded the way they did are most likely guilty of bending the rules in some way or another.

[Gagan]

Gagan stop trying to rationalize this. Even though someone did it in the past doesn't justify you from doing it. When you say you passed an exam but at the time you submitted your resume you haven't, you lied. I don't get why is this concept so difficult; plenty of people have addressed this already.

No, that's not the point. People are treating it like it's the same as lying about say 3 exams (when having 1 only) and expecting to sneak through an interview/hiring process and make it into the company that way. If people could understand the scenario presented was about a job(s) deadline being say 1 week before your exam and if you're 99% confident of passing, whether you would put down you've passed. It's a 1 week discrepancy which most likely won't be found out. The difference? The difference in that exam passed being on your resume could mean a difference between getting a job or not. As others have mentioned, if you fail you can just skip out on the interview.

I thank those who actually addressed the scenario and provided an opinion that actually had to do with the scenario. Everyone else treats it as if it's just simply lying and hoping to get hired. It's NOT the same time. People can't seem to formulate replies that address the original post.


We ALL worked hard for our career. If you can't deal with setbacks properly then maybe you should go into something else.


I don't mean to go off on a tangent. I'm no longer upset, but the SOA not refunding my exam fee clearly shows how money grubbing they are. Plain and simple. It's not a physical limitation in the system to allow this refund. It's more like they found an opportunity to make an extra $175 USD at the expense of a candidate and they took it.


btw try asking Parker about this and see what sort of lecture you'll get. I dare you.


I would NEVER do that. Why? Because I never said I wanted to lie or anything on my resume. My classmates have done this and it was more of a 'bending of the rules' which I'm sure all of us are guilty of. Even Dr. Parker himself. As a professor and head of the department obviously there's no way he'll offer advice that had anything to do with bending the rules.
Truth is, he probably thinks it'll be fine (again, the 1 week discrepancy issue I'm talking about) but he'll never tell you that. HE might get in trouble himself if the university finds out about that so he has reasons not to say anything. I don't know what he thinks but you should be able to see what I mean. As humans, even he would know when to take advantage of a scenario to give yourself an advantage over the competition.



Again, as I said, I will have pissed off many people by making this post. But I don't care. I'm speaking my mind. It's true that most people who replied didn't even addressed the main issue behind the 'bending' of the rules. It's not the same thing as flat out lying about something. The 1 week discrepancy is the only reason why I even brought up this issue.
I don't need people resorting to the same old "dont lie wtf dont call urself an actuary then". Well, that's not to say that's wrong but at least address the issue mentioned in the post.

[Gagan]

Absolutely retarded.. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bending the rules, but saying you passed more exams then you truthfully have is absolutely retarded. Lets say the company hired you. Do you really think they're going to take your word and just attach the P and FM bonuses to your starting salary? I would like to think that HR has enough sense to verify something as important as actuarial credentials. If not, then I'm telling HR that I'm an FSA. HAHA

See, the scenario posted was NOT like this. Do you really think the students in my class plan to work for a company and NEVER pass any exams for real, only on paper?

How often do people lie?
What percent of the lies get caught?
What percent of the catches result in severe consequence?

Lying, cheating, and stealing payoff more often than not. I'm just pointing out that some people think it is worth the risk in order to gain an advantage; others don't. Like I said, I (like most actuary's) am too risk averse to try something of that nature. Others feel differently.

Thank you
At least someone can be reasonable enough to give an answer that doesn't automatically resort to using the word 'idiot' or 'retarded' or whatever and misinterpreting the situation presented.

[Lucy]

Well what about when the test centre has technical difficulties and you are unable to take your exam during the testing window? (Happened to me).

Then you have to wait another 2 months (and pay another 175 USD because in my case they refuse to refund the exam fee). Stuff like this sure makes one want to bend the rules...That's called "shit happens". I'm surprised you had to pay again if it was truly the fault of the testing center, however.

I'm not saying one should, but most of you are oversimplifying things. Everybody bends the rules. It's a part of life. Most of the time you don't get caught and it comes to your advantage. I'm pretty sure there's a + Expected value from this. As someone else has mentioned, if one didn't pass, one would just skip out on the interview....

It's about saying you passed the exam if the deadline for the job application is coming up and say your exam date is a week after for instance. If you pass, then (this is what the original post was asking) is there any consequences? Doesn't seem like that bad given how it could be months before the company even sees your resume, the chances of them noticing any discrepancy is low (again this was part of the original question). IF you fail, then whatever happens, just skip out if you get an interview.
I don't get why you think this is "bending the rules" and not "lying". Have you passed exam X? No, you have not passed exam X, you haven't even taken it yet. Will you be caught? Resumes are all timestamped when we get them, so the odds of being caught are pretty good. Actuaries take a strong interest in exams, and many actuaries and the HR folks who support them look up whether and when a candidate passed each exam. This is also an absurdly small field, and actuaries have friends at nearby companies (hey, we used to work together) and gossip about unusual recruiting situations. So if you were caught, whether by someone checking the dates or by failing the exam and "skipping out" on the interview, there's an excellent chance that it wouldn't just poison your chances at one company, but at several.

So yes, I suppose there's a potential upside. But the potential downside, even ignoring the "I have to live with being the sort of person who lies about stuff that matters" aspect, is pretty significant.

[MountainHawk]

This thread is going to make me:

(a) check exam info more closely and
(b) report people that lie about them to the ABCD for discipline

[Will Durant]

This thread is going to make me:
(a) check exam info more closely and
(b) report people that lie about them to the ABCD for discipline
:iatp:
I am amazed that not only Gagan is willing to lie through his teeth but he seems unable to grasp the concept of a "lie." Somehow he thinks that claiming you passed an exam you have not passed is not a lie. He's the kind of person that makes Enrons happen, and I sure wouldn't want him at my company.

[tommie frazier]

ok, you seem upset that people aren't addressing the first post, so here I go. just to be clear.

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

my problem with it is that it is dishonest. and if I find out about it, you will not get hired. and if you somehow get hired and we find out, you will be terminated. i don't care if it is summer help intern or FT. weirdly, I think the intern might have more at risk, since good luck having that reference checked or employment confirmed.

the harm here is that there is a lot of risk in doing so. the other harm, apparently felt at different levels by different people, is that this is intentionally dishonest.



Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks
I check the passing lists of the resumes that cross my desk. Not sure if others do as well. so you asked "always"-the answer must be no. nothing "always" happens. scores we typically don't care about, and while that can vary by company, i honestly don't care. (on the cas side, passing scores don't exist-you just get a P if you pass)

the venom people are directing at you is because they are guessing from the way you wrote the question that you don't see anything wrong with outright lying during the interview process. they are taking that from your statements about it being "*really*" wrong, and the further rationalization that if it isn't for permanent work it is somehow ok.

maybe you are presenting a devil's advocate stance there, maybe not. but that is the source.

[Loner]

:iatp:
I am amazed that not only Gagan is willing to lie through his teeth but he seems unable to grasp the concept of a "lie." Somehow he thinks that claiming you passed an exam you have not passed is not a lie. He's the kind of person that makes Enrons happen, and I sure wouldn't want him at my company.

I wonder if this is symptomatic of the dearth of Wall Street jobs causing some people who would have entered that field, which has a somewhat more casual relationship with the truth, to seek actuarial work.
And it's not just Wall Street.
I worked in IT for a bit, abd resume padding was absolutely rampant, largely because employers listed skills and experience sets that virtually nobody had. It really seemed to be the norm that you embellished your accomplishments. The worst offenders were the big consulting firms who would tout their vast experience, and then on the start of a project, send the client 15 22-year-olds with no experience and one project manager to cover their asses.

[schizoid]

Why don't you ask the person you're sending your resume to whether he/she is comfortable with you "bending the rules"? I'm sure they'd have a good answer for you.

[JohnLocke]

:iatp:
I am amazed that not only Gagan is willing to lie through his teeth but he seems unable to grasp the concept of a "lie." Somehow he thinks that claiming you passed an exam you have not passed is not a lie. He's the kind of person that makes Enrons happen, and I sure wouldn't want him at my company.

but he's 99% sure he will pass, so it's only 1% of a lie


no, I am not being serious

[Gagan]

the venom people are directing at you is because they are guessing from the way you wrote the question that you don't see anything wrong with outright lying during the interview process. they are taking that from your statements about it being "*really*" wrong, and the further rationalization that if it isn't for permanent work it is somehow ok.

maybe you are presenting a devil's advocate stance there, maybe not. but that is the source.

I like your response. That's all I'm asking. I was just curious. The "1 week discrepancy" thing I was talking about was why I wanted to know. I didn't know some places stamp the resume. I was just wondering what people think about this particular aspect of bending the rules to gain an edge (again, I'm talking about the 1 week discrepancy thing).

This thread is going to make me:

(a) check exam info more closely and
(b) report people that lie about them to the ABCD for discipline

I don't have a problem with that as I've said in a previous post.

:iatp:
I am amazed that not only Gagan is willing to lie through his teeth but he seems unable to grasp the concept of a "lie." Somehow he thinks that claiming you passed an exam you have not passed is not a lie. He's the kind of person that makes Enrons happen, and I sure wouldn't want him at my company.

I never said I wanted to lie. I may be playing a devil's advocate but even then I don't think I am. All I wanted to know was the real situation. There's a big difference between a response like "many places time stamp their resumes, my place does. So the chances of u getting caught are quite likely" vs "don't lie thats idiotic, you can't seem to understand that lying is wrong".

[Will Durant]

There's a big difference between a response like "many places time stamp their resumes, my place does. So the chances of u getting caught are quite likely" vs "don't lie thats idiotic, you can't seem to understand that lying is wrong".
I agree completely. And it's symptomatic of everything that's wrong with the world that you can't tell which is the better response.

[Gagan]

I prefer the response that actually addresses the question at hand instead of one that would more appropriately be a response to a different question along the lines of "I'm thinking of lying about an exam and hope to get into the company without them noticing. I don't plan to pass it, will they check? Can I get away with it?" <---- that's not my question...

I KNOW it's *technically* wrong. Just like I know it's *technically* wrong to speed (yet every single one of us drive faster than the speed limit almost all the time). I don't need people *****ing and insulting me about this. Just address the question if you're gonna respond, that's all I'm asking. If you feel that most companies time stamp their resumes or whatever then say so. If you don't know if the 1 week discrepancy will give you an edge but still feel you should be honest just out of principle, say so. At least treat the question for what it is. THAT is all I'm asking.

Now another thing is, I've stated that I don't plan on lying on my resume in any way (stated multiple times) so those of you accusing me of planning on doing this or siding with people who do this are really off-base.

**
An example of what I mean. What if (somehow) you KNOW the company WON'T time stamp their resumes, ie. there's no way they'll know about the 1 week discrepancy between resume submission date/exam passing date. The difference is a job that pays $80k a year. If you are completely honest you lose to someone who does have 2 exams. If you bend the rules (they won't find out) you end up getting the job. Now wouldn't you say you're decision was 'idiotic' if you were completely honest when bending the truth would've gotten you the job?

**

that's the idea behind the question. That's why I asked. I'm not advocating anything. Just prefer people to see that that's the "reasoning" if you will behind the question asked in the first place. Human beings are opportunists/greedy aren't they (at least the sharp ones are =P).

[Gagan]

Whatever, no matter what I say, some of you just won't get it. Just call me a troll why don't you.

[DoctorNo]

Whatever, no matter what I say, some of you just won't get it. Just call me a troll why don't you.

The other option is that you're unethical.

Given those choices, I can see why you're demanding to be called a troll. :judge:

[Brad Gile]

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks

Your question as posed answers itself. When insurance companies hire interns or beginning actuarial students, they are looking for people who have the potential to become actuaries. They are NOT just looking for bodies to do menial tasks.

There is heavy competition for these positions, especially now in this rotten economy. Actuarial aptitude/exam performance is a primary indicator of your desirability, as is a good work ethic and honesty (which lies at the center of the Professional Code of Conduct).If you lie about this, you will affect the prospects of others and you jeopardize your own future.

You ask, "Is there any harm in this?". If you don't know the answer, I can't help you. If you think this is "harmless", I ask of you only this: stay out of my profession.

[MountainHawk]

I prefer the response that actually addresses the question at hand instead of one that would more appropriately be a response to a different question along the lines of "I'm thinking of lying about an exam and hope to get into the company without them noticing. I don't plan to pass it, will they check? Can I get away with it?" <---- that's not my question...

I KNOW it's *technically* wrong. Just like I know it's *technically* wrong to speed (yet every single one of us drive faster than the speed limit almost all the time). I don't need people *****ing and insulting me about this. Just address the question if you're gonna respond, that's all I'm asking. If you feel that most companies time stamp their resumes or whatever then say so. If you don't know if the 1 week discrepancy will give you an edge but still feel you should be honest just out of principle, say so. At least treat the question for what it is. THAT is all I'm asking.

Now another thing is, I've stated that I don't plan on lying on my resume in any way (stated multiple times) so those of you accusing me of planning on doing this or siding with people who do this are really off-base.

**
An example of what I mean. What if (somehow) you KNOW the company WON'T time stamp their resumes, ie. there's no way they'll know about the 1 week discrepancy between resume submission date/exam passing date. The difference is a job that pays $80k a year. If you are completely honest you lose to someone who does have 2 exams. If you bend the rules (they won't find out) you end up getting the job. Now wouldn't you say you're decision was 'idiotic' if you were completely honest when bending the truth would've gotten you the job?

**

that's the idea behind the question. That's why I asked. I'm not advocating anything. Just prefer people to see that that's the "reasoning" if you will behind the question asked in the first place. Human beings are opportunists/greedy aren't they (at least the sharp ones are =P).
There is harm, because our entire profession is built on ethical conduct.

If you can't understand that doing this, even in your own mind a minor issue, makes you unfit to ever be an actuary in many of our minds.

[Lucy]

My husband is a teacher (high school and college). He is super careful not to do anything that might be construed as sexual harassment. I am an actuary. I am super careful not to do anything that might be construed as theft or financial or professional fraud. Neither of us is super careful about always completely following the posted speed limit. Hmmm. Can you see any pattern?

[tommie frazier]

i get the timing issue you mention, and in the end it could be harmless* (if the person passes). I don't time stamp or look right away. I look the day I am asked to get back to the hiring team with opinion, or the day before the interview. if you passed by then, I doubt I'd know. especially if you didn't send me the resume in an email.

the chance of it blowing up is too risky, IMO. and such a person would look like an unethical doofus, and I would not be happy to find it out. as you know, all kinds of stuff can get in the way of a 99% expected pass. how do you think it would play? it's very risky in an egregiously unprofessional way. speeding to the interview (or exam center, bc you overslept) is very risky in a way that nearly every person can understand (up to certain speeds).

risk/reward is all out of whack in what you describe.

*harmless meaning no tangible harm done. unprofessional and unethical to me still.

[Will Durant]

What if (somehow) you KNOW the company WON'T time stamp their resumes, ie. there's no way they'll know about the 1 week discrepancy between resume submission date/exam passing date. The difference is a job that pays $80k a year. If you are completely honest you lose to someone who does have 2 exams. If you bend the rules (they won't find out) you end up getting the job. Now wouldn't you say you're decision was 'idiotic' if you were completely honest when bending the truth would've gotten you the job?
No. I would NOT NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER LIE (it's not bending the truth, it's LYING) to get the job. I'd go back to teaching which I did before becoming an actuary or work at BK like I did in college. It's called ethics. Doing the ethical thing is never idiotic. I might not make $80K, but I won't have to spend every day worrying about being found out and fired ... and more importantly I will have done the right thing. So I have answered the question you asked, but somehow I don't suppose you will be satisfied.

Done. kthxbai.

[banpeikun]

Maybe you can post-date your resume.

[Gagan]

i get the timing issue you mention, and in the end it could be harmless* (if the person passes). I don't time stamp or look right away. I look the day I am asked to get back to the hiring team with opinion, or the day before the interview. if you passed by then, I doubt I'd know. especially if you didn't send me the resume in an email.

the chance of it blowing up is too risky, IMO. and such a person would look like an unethical doofus, and I would not be happy to find it out. as you know, all kinds of stuff can get in the way of a 99% expected pass. how do you think it would play? it's very risky in an egregiously unprofessional way. speeding to the interview (or exam center, bc you overslept) is very risky in a way that nearly every person can understand (up to certain speeds).

risk/reward is all out of whack in what you describe.

*harmless meaning no tangible harm done. unprofessional and unethical to me still.


Thanks. See this is what I meant. I'm not trying to get people to side with my point of view or anything (again, I never said I plan to lie on my resume in any way). If you think you should never bend the rules to gain an edge (even if the chances are quite low that you'll be found out), then great. It's none of my concern, I'm just happy to receive an opinion about it. Just at least address the situation I described. Thanks for this honest reply.


No. I would NOT NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER LIE (it's not bending the truth, it's LYING) to get the job. I'd go back to teaching which I did before becoming an actuary or work at BK like I did in college. It's called ethics. Doing the ethical thing is never idiotic. I might not make $80K, but I won't have to spend every day worrying about being found out and fired ... and more importantly I will have done the right thing. So I have answered the question you asked, but somehow I don't suppose you will be satisfied.

Done. kthxbai.

Well if you have addressed this issue that I brought up then I would be satisfied. That's all I'm asking. Ok, so no matter what situation, even in the situation I described, you will NEVER under any circumstances, bend the rules (even if you would most likely never be caught - as ppl said, if you fail just skip the interview).
That's good for you. I respect that decision.

So long as people actually understand what my original post was about and don't treat it like any old fraud where one tries to work for a company without passing a single exam but states it on the paper and hopes to get away with it. The scenario is clearly different and I know there are some of you (who actually understand what I'm talking about) who might think it's worth the risk if it's just a 1 week discrepancy. Just saying. I thank those of you who've actually responded to the original post.

[banpeikun]

An example of what I mean. What if (somehow) you KNOW the company WON'T time stamp their resumes, ie. there's no way they'll know about the 1 week discrepancy between resume submission date/exam passing date. The difference is a job that pays $80k a year. If you are completely honest you lose to someone who does have 2 exams. If you bend the rules (they won't find out) you end up getting the job. Now wouldn't you say you're decision was 'idiotic' if you were completely honest when bending the truth would've gotten you the job?
I'd say "you're" decision to wait until after companies' application deadlines to take the exam was 'idiotic'. I'd say "you're" thinking that you magically deserved to be on equal footing with someone who was better prepared than you was 'idiotic'.

I would not say "you're" decision was 'idiotic' if you were completely honest.

[Gagan]

I'd say "you're" decision to wait until after companies' application deadlines to take the exam was 'idiotic'. I'd say "you're" thinking that you magically deserved to be on equal footing with someone who was better prepared than you was 'idiotic'.

I would not say "you're" decision was 'idiotic' if you were completely honest.

We don't get to pick when the resume deadlines occur, or when exam sittings occur. So it's perfectly possible for one's exam to take place after a company's (or many companies') deadlines.

Sorry I don't mean to say it's 'idiotic' if you were honest. I just meant that to some people, if by being TOO honest, and you ruin your chances of getting an 80k salary job (for instance) just because you want to be "correct" based on principles, while someone else who took advantage of this "1 week discrepancy" gets the job....then I don't know, it might not have been worth it to be TOO honest. In the long run, being unethical (technically) for that short bit may have its advantages right? Again, I'm just saying that was my question.

I'm just saying. In some scenarios, it may be worth it to NOT be too honest, in some it's different. I was just posing the question. That's all. I just didn't appreciate people misinterpreting this as if I'm suggesting that people commit full-scale fraud on a company.

[Omikron]

The *real* problem Gagan, is what would happen if everyone did what you're suggesting.

[Lucy]

. . . I just didn't appreciate people misinterpreting this as if I'm suggesting that people commit full-scale fraud on a company.But what you are suggesting is "full-scale fraud". You are claiming to have passed an exam that you haven't passed. An exam that you haven't even sat for. I don't see how this is different from "where one tries to work for a company without passing a single exam but states it on the paper and hopes to get away with it." That's exactly what you've described.

[Gagan]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting anything (the only thing I'm suggesting is that people interpret the question the way it was meant to be interpreted, and I was presenting the POV from the students in my class who were doing this).

I'm sure not everyone does it, but dare I say nobody does it, I don't know about that.

I was just posing the question. There are people who are against this scenario and I'm perfectly fine with that. I don't plan on lying on my resume. I was a little angry when people kept treating the question as if I were suggesting everyone to commit full-scale fraud on the company. The original scenario is nothing like that.

[Gagan]

But what you are suggesting is "full-scale fraud". You are claiming to have passed an exam that you haven't passed. An exam that you haven't even sat for. I don't see how this is different from "where one tries to work for a company without passing a single exam but states it on the paper and hopes to get away with it." That's exactly what you've described.

No, that's different. In this "scenario" you will have passed ~1 week after you have submitted your resume. 1 month after you have passed "for real" the employer reads your resume for the first time and sees that you've passed your exams (in fact, you have passed your exams). That little discrepancy in the dates will probably go unnoticed. Though, maybe in some companies it's different.

That's the difference between that and hoping to pass off working for a company (and getting P and FM exam bonuses) without ever passing a single exam, as some poster suggested. I don't mean to sound like a dick, but is it really that hard to see the difference in the two scenarios?

Again I was just posing the question.

[Omikron]

Thank you
At least someone can be reasonable enough to give an answer that doesn't automatically resort to using the word 'idiot' or 'retarded' or whatever and misinterpreting the situation presented.

Well, this does feel like the special olympics for ethics. You're welcome to ask President Obama what his opinion is.

[JohnLocke]

That's the difference between that and hoping to pass off working for a company (and getting P and FM exam bonuses) without ever passing a single exam, as some poster suggested. I don't mean to sound like a dick, but is it really that hard to see the difference in the two scenarios?



Yes, it is *slightly* different. However, lying=lying. No matter how you change the inconsequential details this cute little equality holds.

[Lucy]

No, that's different. In this "scenario" you will have passed ~1 week after you have submitted your resume. 1 month after you have passed "for real" the employer reads your resume for the first time and sees that you've passed your exams (in fact, you have passed your exams). That little discrepancy in the dates will probably go unnoticed. Though, maybe in some companies it's different.No, you hope and expect you will have passed in a week. There's a non-trivial chance you are wrong about that. for instance, you might have the wrong time on your cell phone. If, somehow, you could actually know for sure that you would pass in a week I might possibly see your point. But you don't.

That's the difference between that and hoping to pass off working for a company (and getting P and FM exam bonuses) without ever passing a single exam, as some poster suggested. I don't mean to sound like a dick, but is it really that hard to see the difference in the two scenarios?So in your second scenario you claim to have passed a bunch of exams without ever sitting for them, or what? That scenario is different because it would never happen. I've never worked for a company that didn't explicitly check that you have the exams you claim to have. Yeah, you might possibly get away with the first lie. There's no chance in hell you'd get away with the second one, so it would be completely idiotic to try. Not just dishonest, but abysmally stupid. Okay, maybe there's a 3% chance you wouldn't get caught with the second one. There must be some little companies somewhere that don't check exam status. Maybe a 1% chance you wouldn't get caught. It'd pretty much have to be a company where you didn't ever interact with any other actuary.

So I guess the difference is that you don't need any ethics at all to realize that a 97% chance of ending your career with a lie is a bad idea, but you do need some modicum of ethics to realize it's a bad idea to lie about your exam status in a situation where you might realistically get away with it.

[nonactuarialactuary]

The cover letter exists to explain these types of things.

On your resume, put:

Exam P - Passed November 2007
Exam FM - Awaiting results from May 2008 sitting.

In your cover letter, put:

I sat for Exam FM in May 2008. While I have not officially seen my results, I am confident that I passed and will receive the official results on July 1st, 2008.

In my opinion, this isn't even an ethical thing. Applicants usually send out resumes in bulk. Imagine sending out 100 copies of your resume stating that you've passed exam FM in May 2008 only to find out later that for some reason, you failed. Also imagine that of those 100 resumes you sent out, you've scheduled interviews at 10 places. Are you going to cancel all 10 of those interviews that you've received at that point because you misled employers? If you hadn't lied, then maybe 3 or 4 of the 10 companies you would have interviewed with would have extended job offers to a candidate with only 1 exam. Going the first route allows you to cover yourself in both scenarios. Employers who would hire you with only one exam will still hire you and you don't have to worry about canceling interviews to save face. Employers requiring two exams see your situation and will ask you of your exam details later after you've received your official results.

There are other costs too. As others have mentioned, this profession is surprisingly small, and rumors will spread if you're seen as the guy who lies on his resume. To me, the potential costs of lying on a resume in the manner you have suggested here outweigh the benefits. Explain your situation with two short sentences in the cover letter because there is a small but nonzero probability of failing the exam and looking like a jackass.

[Amy7]

My husband is a teacher (high school and college). He is super careful not to do anything that might be construed as sexual harassment. I am an actuary. I am super careful not to do anything that might be construed as theft or financial or professional fraud. Neither of us is super careful about always completely following the posted speed limit. Hmmm. Can you see any pattern?

Gagan, I think Lucy has put her finger on an important point.

(1) I agree with you that most people don't follow every societal "rule" 100% of the time. As you say, speeding is a good example; most of us have speeded once in a while and many people would agree that driving 10mph higher than the speed limit on a highway with few cars is only a problem if you cause an accident or you get caught. On the other hand, most of us think driving 60mph on a suburban street with kids playing who might run in front of your car is wrong for many reasons. For a rule like the speed limit, we understand it is a matter of degree. You are hoping we will have reactions like this to your resume scenario.

(2) On the other hand, try to make an argument like that about rape. If you got on this board and asked, "Some of my friends get girls drunk and then ... and if she only says no a few times and doesn't fight and will never be able to prove it's rape, is there any harm in that?" and then complained respondents didn't understand the difference between that and abducting a girl on the street at gunpoint and tying her up and raping her, you would expect people to react with anger and criticise your ethics.

Every society has some issues which are seen as ethically very important, and some areas where there are more grey areas. Professions are like their own mini-societies, a culture within a culture, where ethical standards are based on what is important for the profession. In the actuarial culture, honesty is extremely important because heavy decisions are made just based on our word. Exam status is also important. This is why you are getting responses that sound closer to what you would expect for situation (2) above, even if in college-student culture this would fall closer to (1). Hopefully, if they do continue in the profession, your classmates will learn this cultural value quickly, before it destroys their career. Because the real danger (for them) is not whether they will be caught this time, but that a person who acts like this once is likely to do it again, and again, and they are likely to be caught eventually. And since their bosses/colleagues see it like situation (2), they will endeavor to keep such a person out of their profession.

[vividox]

Why is this post still going? People are just skipping the first 120 posts and jumping to conclusions. All this stuff has already been discussed ad naseum in this thread.

[Omikron]

Why is this post still going? People are just skipping the first 120 posts and jumping to conclusions. All this stuff has already been discussed ad naseum in this thread.

We got tired of complaining about AIG bonuses, so theoretical situations involving potentially lying about passing an actuarial exam seemed like fun.

[twig93]

It's not a case of "lying" on the resume.

You seem to think that it's not lying. Most, if not all, of the other posters disagree. You seem to be looking for someone on here to tell you it's OK, and we don't think it is. (At least none of the posters I've read think it's OK - other than you.)

If you're sitting for an exam tomorrow and you fill out a form today indicating that you passed the exam: YOU ARE LYING!!!

It is not a matter of flexible ethics. This is not "bending" the rules. This is not a gray area.

This is simple. This is black and white. It is lying.

[twig93]

No, that's different. In this "scenario" you will have passed ~1 week after you have submitted your resume. 1 month after you have passed "for real" the employer reads your resume for the first time and sees that you've passed your exams (in fact, you have passed your exams). That little discrepancy in the dates will probably go unnoticed. Though, maybe in some companies it's different.

That's the difference between that and hoping to pass off working for a company (and getting P and FM exam bonuses) without ever passing a single exam, as some poster suggested. I don't mean to sound like a dick, but is it really that hard to see the difference in the two scenarios?

Again I was just posing the question.

What is so freakin' hard to understand about sending an accurate resume not listing the exam as passed - listing that you're sitting for it on x/x/xxxx date and then sending an updated resume after you've gotten your passing score? This happens all the time in this industry - it's the norm.

That's not lying. What you are suggesting - like it or not - is lying. I agree with Lucy's post.

[banpeikun]

He feels it is unfair that his resume looks inferior to that of someone who has actually passed P.

[JMO]

I think we should encourage him to do what he thinks is best. Then when we see a resume where pass date(s) don't correspond to the date we got the resume, we'll know his irl identity.

[Gagan]

nope
Where did some of you get the idea that I'm looking for someone to tell me it's okay? I accepted the fact that technically it's wrong. I guess some people can't read?

The only reason this thread continued past the 7th or so page was that when I looked more closely at the replies, a majority of the people can't seem to understand what my initial post was about.

Bottom Line:
Students in my class were lying on their resume about passing P on those resumes which have deadlines right before the March P exam window. The question was whether it was worth it to do something like this because, theoretically, an employer with 100s of resumes to go through, possibly 1 month or so down the road, will most likely not notice the 1 week or so discrepancy between your resume submission date vs the date you actually passed P. The potential benefit is that you have an edge because you in fact DID pass P weeks before the employer looks at it. Companies don't hire every single month, so it's sort of like a benefits vs risk where IT SEEMS that the risk is small. I'm not saying that employers are dumb but the reason above is why the question was posed in the first place.

Is this so hard to comprehend? Responses like "this isn't worth it because many companies timestamp the resume" or "nah it's not worth it because in the slight chance that your employer is smart and takes the dates into account you are screwed" actually TELL me something.

Statements like "lying is lying" or "dont call yourself an actuary if you lie" TELL ME NOTHING. You might as well just read my topic title, see the word "lying" and post a reply without bothering to read the content.

read the bold again if you can't understand WHY someone (me) would ask this question. Benefits vs risk where the risk (1 week discrepancy) theoretically seems nonexistant. That's why the question was asked.

that's ALL I'm asking. I've stated many times I haven't and am not planning to do this. I swear, it's like asking if I should bum some free food from my buddy who works at mcdonalds (technically stealing) and I get people *****ing at me about morals and ethics saying "stealing is stealing, don't call yourself a mature adult."

[JohnLocke]

nope
Where did some of you get the idea that I'm looking for someone to tell me it's okay? I accepted the fact that technically it's wrong. I guess some people can't read?

The only reason this thread continued past the 7th or so page was that when I looked more closely at the replies, a majority of the people can't seem to understand what my initial post was about.

Bottom Line:
Students in my class were lying on their resume about passing P on those resumes which have deadlines right before the March P exam window. The question was whether it was worth it to do something like this because, theoretically, an employer with 100s of resumes to go through, possibly 1 month or so down the road, will most likely not notice the 1 week or so discrepancy between your resume submission date vs the date you actually passed P. The potential benefit is that you have an edge because you in fact DID pass P weeks before the employer looks at it. Companies don't hire every single month, so it's sort of like a benefits vs risk where IT SEEMS that the risk is small. I'm not saying that employers are dumb but the reason above is why the question was posed in the first place.

Is this so hard to comprehend? Responses like "this isn't worth it because many companies timestamp the resume" or "nah it's not worth it because in the slight chance that your employer is smart and takes the dates into account you are screwed" actually TELL me something.

Statements like "lying is lying" or "dont call yourself an actuary if you lie" TELL ME NOTHING. You might as well just read my topic title, see the word "lying" and post a reply without bothering to read the content.

read the bold again if you can't understand WHY someone (me) would ask this question. Benefits vs risk where the risk (1 week discrepancy) theoretically seems nonexistant. That's why the question was asked.

that's ALL I'm asking. I've stated many times I haven't and am not planning to do this. I swear, it's like asking if I should bum some free food from my buddy who works at mcdonalds (technically stealing) and I get people *****ing at me about morals and ethics saying "stealing is stealing, don't call yourself a mature adult."


Instead of putting in all this effort to be dishonest, why not just, maybe, umm, TAKE AND PASS THE EXAM! And if you were too lazy to do it, then suck it up.

[JohnLocke]

Is this so hard to comprehend? Responses like "this isn't worth it because many companies timestamp the resume" or "nah it's not worth it because in the slight chance that your employer is smart and takes the dates into account you are screwed" actually TELL me something.

Sound like you want advice on if you can lie. Why shouldn't ppl get indignant about this?

[Gagan]

Gagan, I think Lucy has put her finger on an important point.

(1) ......

(2) .....

I read you loud and clear. Although to be honest the rape scenario is a touchy subject IMO because it involves physical contact, whether it's abuse or sex, with an individual. I think my situation is more akin to something like bumming free food off a friend who works at macdonalds (like have him throw in an extra burger, or have him give you it for half off when he shouldnt). There's an advantage in that it's free food, but there's also a risk that the friend gets caught and fired. Benefits vs risk. I'm sure tons of people have done this. Addressing that point is fine, but simply saying 'stealing is stealing, you're an *******' doesn't contribute to anything at all.

[JMO]

Bottom Line:
Students in my class were lying on their resume about passing P on those resumes which have deadlines right before the March P exam window. The question was whether it was worth it to do something like this because, theoretically, an employer with 100s of resumes to go through, possibly 1 month or so down the road, will most likely not notice the 1 week or so discrepancy between your resume submission date vs the date you actually passed P. The potential benefit is that you have an edge because you in fact DID pass P weeks before the employer looks at it. Companies don't hire every single month, so it's sort of like a benefits vs risk where IT SEEMS that the risk is small. I'm not saying that employers are dumb but the reason above is why the question was posed in the first place.

So you are looking for arguments to convince these "other students" not to do it? That puts a whole new complexion on this thread.

[Gagan]

Instead of putting in all this effort to be dishonest, why not just, maybe, umm, TAKE AND PASS THE EXAM! And if you were too lazy to do it, then suck it up.

I was just posing a question. For exam P you get your results right away (a prelim pass pretty much guarantees an actual pass, whereas a prelim fail may or may not guarantee a fail). It was just a simple question about benefits vs risk. Saying "lying is lying, that's the bottom line" doesn't address the question at all. That's what I was irritated about.

Sound like you want advice on if you can lie. Why shouldn't ppl get indignant about this?

Someone didn't read my reply above.
Thing is, can people actually read and address the post, instead of throwing a canned "lying is lying" response?

[nizzi]

lying is lying bro

[J.T.]

Well what about when the test centre has technical difficulties and you are unable to take your exam during the testing window? (Happened to me).

Then you have to wait another 2 months (and pay another 175 USD because in my case they refuse to refund the exam fee). Stuff like this sure makes one want to bend the rules...

I'm not saying one should, but most of you are oversimplifying things. Everybody bends the rules. It's a part of life. Most of the time you don't get caught and it comes to your advantage. I'm pretty sure there's a + Expected value from this. As someone else has mentioned, if one didn't pass, one would just skip out on the interview....

I'm just saying....to go as far as saying 'don't call yourself an actuary' or words to that effect is almost hypocritical. No offense to anyone, but I'm hoping you will see my point. Remember, the ORIGINAL post was not about lying your exams and then work full time at a company hoping they won't find out....that's NOT what the original post was about. It's about saying you passed the exam if the deadline for the job application is coming up and say your exam date is a week after for instance. If you pass, then (this is what the original post was asking) is there any consequences? Doesn't seem like that bad given how it could be months before the company even sees your resume, the chances of them noticing any discrepancy is low (again this was part of the original question). IF you fail, then whatever happens, just skip out if you get an interview.

Why some of you fail to address this original post and simply go forward with "thats stupid, if you get caught your career is over".

Who dares to say they never speed? Never steal? Never bend the rules? Given the above scenario, wouldn't this have a positive expected value seeing as you pretty much can't lose? As an actuary it's almost like you're "dumb" if you don't do this.

Again, not saying I will do it but seriously, I don't get why some people can't properly address the issue brought up in the original post.

PS. I 100% guarantee most of you guys have bent the rules in some way or another. I bet some of you have even lied about your exams (same scenario brought up in original post) in hopes of passing it right after sending in the resume. Of course you guys will never admit it....

See this is what I mean. Can people not read? If you can't comprehend the scenario that was presented in the original post (and my last post) then seriously don't reply. It's not a case of "lying" on the resume. You're using the word "lie" as if the person is boldly saying they passed 3 exams even when they really only passed 1 and it would be OBVIOUS and easy for the company to find out.

I'm not saying this is right. I'm saying stop treating it as if someone is flat out lying about being an ASA or whatever or somethign ridiculous like that. If you can understand the scenario that was presented, you'll see it's different. If you are able to pass 1 week after your resume submission, some might say you're a fool if you don't bend the truth a little to gain an edge. If you can't understand that then please don't bother replying. This isn't about flat out lying and making up crap on the resume. You'll see that this is different.





Yes it is a setback. How can it not be? The setback isn't as bad as yours but it's still considered a setback, no?

For the record (in case some people can't read), I don't plan on lying on my resume in any way. NEVER have.
I'm just sick and tired of people who can't read and instead of understanding the scenario which was more like 'bending the rules', they treat it as if it's about people making OBVIOUS lies on the resumes (like saying you passed 3 exams when you only passed 1 and then not bothering to pass the others and just hope to 'sneak by' and get hired). That's totally different.

Also, this is a forum. Whining or not, at least it creates discussion (or flaming). I try not to be 'whiny'. In my other topic I was merely stating the situation and asking for advice on how to get through the setback. In this post, I'm just tired of people not understanding what the original post was about. What's worse is most people who responded the way they did are most likely guilty of bending the rules in some way or another.

I'm going to respond to your post because you seemed to take offense to it. You seemed to think I didn't read your original post. I did read your post, and I stand by my statement. If I find out that an actuary, or actuarial student in my company did this, I don't want to work with you. It's dishonest, and isn't appropriate in the professional career. I hold myself to a high standard concerning my credentials, as do most others in this career.

When I applied for my first actuarial job, I waited many months. I had one exam, was working on the second, and didn't think to put on there that I had already passed it. I sent updated resumes, with a cover letter explaining that I had just received notification that I had passed another exam. It served two purposes...1. Hey, look at me, I just passed ANOTHER exam, and 2. You received my resume just now, and are probably going to look at it at the moment. It might stick in your mind.

Bottom line: You've not passed the exam; you've not taken the exam. It's lying in a professional capacity, and against our code of conduct. I don't care if it's tomorrow or next week or in a year. You can't guarantee that you will pass, and in many cases, many college students don't have a clue what these exams are about. I read your post, and every other post. Personally, I don't really want you working with me, since I can see that you don't have a strong sense of work ethic...because that's what exams are. Until you've gone through the hell of the exams, don't even think you can state that there is no problem with *fudging* it just a little.

p.s. No, I don't usually speed. I'm probably one of the few. Most everyone I know does, and no, I generally don't have a problem with it...unless you are going way too fast. Do I feel that they are breaking the law? Yes. But it's a law, not a ethical issue IMO. If you are driving too fast to be safe and responsible, then yes, it's a problem. If you aren't, then so be it. You aren't being responsible by putting that on your resume if you haven't passed the exam. Do I bend the rules? Occasionally. Not very often, and I sure wouldn't do it to get a job, especially in this career. You've obviously not picked up on the numerous people here stating that this is a small world. Almost every actuary (and most of the students) that I've worked with in the past are known by someone here at my current job. Your name WILL get passed around if you are caught. It's not worth it to me.

[Ginormous76]

To Gagan:
I have read through all the posts.
Your McDonald's scenario is poor. If your friend gets fired from McD's for giving a free burger away, I doubt he'll be blackballed at every restaurant or fast food chain. He may not even be fired, just have to reimburse the company. I don't know what their rules are.

Amy7 makes a good analogy. If you won't get busted for rape (even if it is), is it ok to do it? I believe that is similar to putting down a pass on a resume when you haven't even sat for the exam. If you think it's ok to do, then do it. The upside: You can get a job interview (which then increases your probability of getting caught). If you get caught, you could be blackballed and potentially banned from the SOA/CAS. Both have pleasurable upsides (if you can get past the morality) and terrible downsides.

It's been awhile, but you are under the assumption that official results come out within a month. I don't know if that's true or not, but I thought even the computer based exams took 6-8 weeks for official scores. Also, you seem to be assuming that if March 10 is an application deadline, people won't look at your resume until April 10. That seems like a stretch to me as well.

For the lying is lying posts, they are correct. Today is March 23. Let's say on March 25 I am taking exam P. If I say today that I have passed exam P, I am lying. This isn't bending the rules, it is lying. You seem to be stating your post in a reflective mode. It seems like your saying on Feb 23, I submitted a resume that said I passed P and I didn't pass it until Feb 25 (not you specifically, but 2nd person in the English language is not very definitive, I know you have repeatedly said you aren't doing this). Is this ok to do? I still believe that it is not, even reflectively. I also believe that there are potential punitive actions for doing this, which would also answer your question regarding if it is more wrong than morally wrong. There is a large difference between breaking the speed limit and going against the nature of your profession. I don't remember the exact wording, but basically anything an actuary says is considered an actuarial opinion unless stipulated otherwise. Actuarial opinions are often taken from oral communication. This is part of the reason why there is a code of conduct and actuaries must be careful about what they say.

To attempt to address your OP even more:
You asked specifically about internships. I think companies do a background check on interns as thoroughly as they do full-time candidates. If I discovered that you intentionally lied, I would report you. I think most people working in the actuarial profession would, because we've all gone through/are going through a career that takes a lot of hard work. We are going to do our best to not let cheaters get through, because integrity is vital to actuaries.

If I failed to answer anything, let me know. I will elaborate. I'm not perfect, so I may have forgotten something.

(Then again, I think someone said this was in Canada. Nobody cares about Canada. They never really influence the world in any way.)

(Had to get a Canada crack in there. A completely serious post is no fun.)

[Ginormous76]

Your name WILL get passed around if you are caught. It's not worth it to me.

What percentage of actuaries do you think are on this board? I'm just thinking that if someone found someone doing this, you would quickly see a post saying, "Person X lies on their resume." This would get passed around like wildfire, even to people who don't post on here.

[Will Durant]

I accepted the fact that technically it's wrong. I guess some people can't read?

it's like asking if I should bum some free food from my buddy who works at mcdonalds (technically stealing) and I get people *****ing at me about morals and ethics saying "stealing is stealing, don't call yourself a mature adult."
Why do you keep using the word technically.

Statements like "lying is lying" or "dont call yourself an actuary if you lie" TELL ME NOTHING. You might as well just read my topic title, see the word "lying" and post a reply without bothering to read the content.
I find it very telling that you think that an answer that says DON'T FREAKING LIE without analyzing the probability of getting caught is not helpful.

:2pac:

DON'T FREAKING LIE. DON'T DO IT. TELL THE TRUTH. IF YOU DIDN'T PASS P, DON'T SAY YOU DID. IT ISN'T "TECHNICALLY" LYING. IT'S LYING.

How is this answer not helpful? It's actually considerably more helpful because letting you know that honesty is expected is more important than making you think that honesty is only expected when you can't get away with lying.

[Will Durant]

If your friend gets fired from McD's for giving a free burger away, I doubt he'll be blackballed at every restaurant or fast food chain. He may not even be fired, just have to reimburse the company. I don't know what their rules are.
Don't know what the rules are now, but when I worked in BK the only thing that would get you fired faster than giving free burgers to your friends would be actually taking cash out of a register. No questions asked, don't finish your shift, don't let the door hit you on the butt, kthxbai.

[J.T.]

What percentage of actuaries do you think are on this board? I'm just thinking that if someone found someone doing this, you would quickly see a post saying, "Person X lies on their resume." This would get passed around like wildfire, even to people who don't post on here.

It doesn't have anything to do with this board.

Actuaries get together in real life, not just on a web board. There are people I've worked with who are either on here sporadically, or not at all. Doesn't mean that someone 5 states away doesn't know who they are. When you go to annual meetings or whatever, it gets passed.

You might be e-mailing someone who was a former coworker just chatting, and it comes up about resume horror stories, and then it gets into whatever, your name comes up, and instantly, you're nixed at two companies. It gets spread, very easily.

I changed jobs a while ago. I interviewed at 6 places (counting both phone and in person interviews). All 6 of the companies had someone who knew my boss. He has never been on this site. They knew about me before I ever got there. That's what we mean about it being a small world.

[nizzi]

Don't know what the rules are now, but when I worked in BK the only thing that would get you fired faster than giving free burgers to your friends would be actually taking cash out of a register. No questions asked, don't finish your shift, don't let the door hit you on the butt, kthxbai.

That is still the rule.
And thanks to these idiots, everyone applying to these jobs now have to go through a seemingly standardized 60-200+ questionnaire. Pretty much asking the same basic 5 questions too.

On a scale of 1-10, how wrong do you think it is to steal money from the register?
On a scale of 1-10, how wrong do you think it is to steal a stapler?

It's actually amazing how people respond!

[neofan]

Keep rolling, this thread cracks me up (Saves boredom for the day) :horse:

[Doc Holiday]

because, theoretically, an employer with 100s of resumes to go through, possibly 1 month or so down the road, will most likely not notice the 1 week or so discrepancy between your resume submission date vs the date you actually passed P. The potential benefit is that you have an edge because you in fact DID pass P weeks before the employer looks at it. Companies don't hire every single month, so it's sort of like a benefits vs risk where IT SEEMS that the risk is small.

Didn't you just give a dirty laundry list of reasons why you weren't able to sit for P/1 in another thread?

In this case, while the risk of getting caught seems small, the consequences are dramatic for your (or your friend's) career.

If in fact you do pass exam P/1 before the employer looks at it, you're able to follow up on your original application/resume with updated information. Whatever edge you're hoping to get isn't much of one then doing it the right way. If your "friends" want to be liars when they don't have to be, then so be it. Just don't apply to my company.

[schizoid]

i strongly encourage you to try it and let us know how it goes.

this thread is getting boring, and your endeavour could really spice it up.

[Will Durant]

Unfortunately his friend will probably lie about how it turns out.

But I agree, this is almost as good as a TZK thread.

[Gagan]

Ok I did a careful read again of the first 6 or so pages of this thread and I think it's time to end this.

First and foremost, I'll just say again just to be clear that I have NOT lied on my resume and don't plan to.

Second of all, I apologize if I've offended anyone (especially those who've been around here many years) because I did realize there weren't exactly that many posts that "didn't address the scenario" as I had kept saying.


What percentage of actuaries do you think are on this board? I'm just thinking that if someone found someone doing this, you would quickly see a post saying, "Person X lies on their resume." This would get passed around like wildfire, even to people who don't post on here.

I have no problem with this response. Perhaps I was just irritated that nobody elaborating on just how likely it is for the '1 week discrepancy' in the dates to be noticed by an employer.



Yeah, there's really a problem with this and I hope they get nailed.

If you can't tell the truth at this stage of your career, don't enter this industry.

I guess I just didn't appreciate the fact that I was given a straight up "lying is lying" type of response, instead of one that addresses this from the candidate's point of view (ie. how likely you are to be caught. benefits VS risk). I must note I don't have anything against D.W. Simpson. I don't want anyone, particularly D.W. Simpson himself to see my response here and think that I'm insulting him or anything.

You don't get the result right away, do you? Isn't it a preliminary pass; i.e. not guaranteed to be a pass? Also, they can look and see if you are on a passing list for a sitting and if you're not, you could be in some hot water. Plus at the intern level, they aren't investing as much in you and can fire you on the spot with little real impact to their operations.

I appreciate this response.

That is IDIOTIC.

Not this one.

It's not lying if they don't get caught. An employer can verify by checking the corresponding pass list on the SOA/CAS website. The risk the candidate takes is whether or not the employer chooses to do this. Personally, I'm too risk adverse for such practice. Others may feel different.

See, an objective point of view. I appreciate that. ie. Someone who understands WHY a student or w/e MIGHT try to bend the rules by lying (1 week discrepancy again) because it seemed (again, from a student's POV) that the employer wouldn't notice given the pile of resumes/other stuff the employer is busy with. If, in fact, this is not the case, then I appreciate any responses that address that.

i used to check for passing names-which are public. I would ask someone when they passed it. (I don't care how many times they took it-just when they passed it)

so, this person would not really make it through my screen all that well.

Fair enough.

I hope they get caught and boiled. I've always (naively?) viewed this as a profession with integrity (or at least honesty). Anyone caught lying about exams should be barred from credentials. IMO.

The reason I was irritated was that this is a general response against any instance of 'lying'. It does not see the situation from the student's POV.

How often do people lie?
What percent of the lies get caught?
What percent of the catches result in severe consequence?

Lying, cheating, and stealing payoff more often than not. I'm just pointing out that some people think it is worth the risk in order to gain an advantage; others don't. Like I said, I (like most actuary's) am too risk averse to try something of that nature. Others feel differently.

I agree with this, that lying & cheating and stealing pay off more often than not. Not saying I would say on an absolute level that you shouldn't lie or whatever, obviously there are degrees.

Absolutely retarded.. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bending the rules, but saying you passed more exams then you truthfully have is absolutely retarded. Lets say the company hired you. Do you really think they're going to take your word and just attach the P and FM bonuses to your starting salary? I would like to think that HR has enough sense to verify something as important as actuarial credentials. If not, then I'm telling HR that I'm an FSA. HAHA

See, the scenario is nothing like this. Claiming to be an FSA is CLEARLY retarded. Similarly about the exam bonuses. This is obvious that you can be caught. What the scenario above was addressing was whether an employer would notice the 1 week discrepancy between the date the exam was taken and when you passed, ie. how likely is that?

If you are asking if there is a problem with being morally and ethically wrong then I feel sorry for you dawg. As for the other students doing this, stay away from the herd. ya heard :rimshot:

I guess I must not have phrased the question the way I thought I did. Based on that I guess I can see why you would say that. Perhaps if I had stated "in reality, what is the likelihood of an employer noticing the 1 week discrepancy" I might've received a different response. Don't get me wrong, I never intended to say that this is NOT morally/ethically wrong. I'm perfectly aware that it is.

Next thread will be 'Is it ok to say I've passed 4 exams, even though they aren't actuarial exams? I didn't say which ones, I just said 4 exams, so it's not a lie. Duuuurrrrrr'.

Totally irrelevant.

My fave was the OP trying to justify that it might be ok as its just a summer co op and not a full time position. Why not just say you are an FSA, it's just a co op!

Makes no sense. Not what the scenario was about. There's a MAJOR difference between lying that your an FSA vs a student lying on the resume (resume submission deadline being 1 week before exam P date) in order to gain an edge and not have to wait another year or so before the next hiring period.

First off, you guys got trolled.

Secondly, this idea isn't all doom and gloom like all the goodies here would lead you to believe.

1. Not everyone checks your exams. Nobody checked mine.
2. Your name isn't going to be on any list for a preliminary pass anyway.
3. Make sure you schedule the interview for after your test. If you pass, show up and all is good. If you don't pass, just skip out on the interview. Nobody is going to dig into your personal exam history if you aren't even a potential candidate anymore.
4. And give me a break about all these time stamp theories. All I ever hear is people bit**ing they have to sift through 100's of resumes. Honestly, you think after finally dwindiling it down to 10 resumes, they are going to go back and check the time stamps?

While I don't appreciate the troll comment, I appreciate the honesty and description of what *really* happens. THAT was the reason I created this thread. It was because from a student's POV, the company must have tons of resumes and are always busy so this discrepancy in the exam pass/resume date may not be noticed.

At this point, you should have said, "Oh! Well, I've also passed CAS exam 1!"

dajfldjfkladf

Your resume must first pass through HR. HR certainly isn't going to do this research. Then your resume is passed to an Actuarial Manager. Manager then schedules phone interviews with all candidates. Manager then picks a handful of candidates for possible in-person interview. This is the first point I can see any kind of exam verification occurring.

Appreciate the description of the process that goes on.

The only major risk I see is if the candidate ends up not passing the exam. In that case, like Goose says, just duck out of the phone interview.

Edit: maybe also a small risk that your resume has unusually short queue time in HR. Resume says you passed exam on March 20th, and manager reads your resume on March 13th

Yeah I was just asking. I appreciate the description of what the risk is.

HR deadline is March 13th. Then HR has organize resumes, develop criteria to weed the pool down to a certain number, then go through them all. That process doesn't happen over night. By the time an actuarial manager even looks at your resume, it could be a few weeks.

That's why I asked. That's what the students in my class were thinking (well it's understandable to think this way because most companies receive tons of resumes and as you said, the process doesn't happen overnight.)

You're right, it doesn't nullify the fact. But you're assuming a few things: (1) interviewer knows the exact application deadline; (2) interviewer knows the exact day of the exam/results; (3) interviewer notices the mismatch; (4) interviewer cares given the interviewee has an accurate transcript.

Exactly why I brought this up.




There were some more, and I believe I quoted more "good, relevant" posts than those who simply accuse me of lying or give me uninformative responses.

Now to respond to the recent posts:

To Gagan:
I have read through all the posts.
Your McDonald's scenario is poor. If your friend gets fired from McD's for giving a free burger away, I doubt he'll be blackballed at every restaurant or fast food chain. He may not even be fired, just have to reimburse the company. I don't know what their rules are.

Amy7 makes a good analogy. If you won't get busted for rape (even if it is), is it ok to do it? I believe that is similar to putting down a pass on a resume when you haven't even sat for the exam. If you think it's ok to do, then do it. The upside: You can get a job interview (which then increases your probability of getting caught). If you get caught, you could be blackballed and potentially banned from the SOA/CAS. Both have pleasurable upsides (if you can get past the morality) and terrible downsides.


If we're discussing ethics, I think the mcdonald's scenario is more appropriate. Amy7's post was good and I appreciate her response (unlike some of the other responses which are pretty much meaningless as they simply throw a canned 'lying is lying' reply). Rape is not even on the same level. Much like I wouldn't appreciate anyone bringing murder into this analogy either.

I'm going to respond to your post because you seemed to take offense to it. You seemed to think I didn't read your original post. I did read your post, and I stand by my statement.

....

Your name WILL get passed around if you are caught. It's not worth it to me.

Fair enough. I was never offended at the thought of "not getting away" being a possibility. Just didn't appreciate responses that simply say "lying is lying, no matter what you say" or words to that effect.

That is still the rule.
And thanks to these idiots, everyone applying to these jobs now have to go through a seemingly standardized 60-200+ questionnaire. Pretty much asking the same basic 5 questions too.

On a scale of 1-10, how wrong do you think it is to steal money from the register?
On a scale of 1-10, how wrong do you think it is to steal a stapler?

It's actually amazing how people respond!

Just to speak the truth, on questions like these, I can't see how ANY candidate would indicate the TRUTH if he were truly dishonest to the core.

Didn't you just give a dirty laundry list of reasons why you weren't able to sit for P/1 in another thread?

In this case, while the risk of getting caught seems small, the consequences are dramatic for your (or your friend's) career.

If in fact you do pass exam P/1 before the employer looks at it, you're able to follow up on your original application/resume with updated information. Whatever edge you're hoping to get isn't much of one then doing it the right way. If your "friends" want to be liars when they don't have to be, then so be it. Just don't apply to my company.

Appreciate this.

Again, I apologize to have offended anyone. I don't plan to lie on my resume. I think it was more that I was expecting responses either from an objective POV, or at least with some acknowledgement of why someone MIGHT think about doing this (lying or "bending the rules" to gain an edge in something).

Cheers folks.

[ElDucky]

don't want anyone, particularly D.W. Simpson himself to see my response here

Wait. Was D.W. Simpson a real person? I never even thought about it. In any case I don't think there is a D.W. Simpson working at D.W. Simpson.

Unless of course this is a reference to the D.W. Simpson who posts here, who is of course not D.W. Simpson.

Did I set a record for D.W. Simpson/other words ratio? Short a message that just repeats D.W. Simpsons over and over.

[JohnLocke]

I hope they get caught and boiled. I've always (naively?) viewed this as a profession with integrity (or at least honesty). Anyone caught lying about exams should be barred from credentials. IMO.


The reason I was irritated was that this is a general response against any instance of 'lying'. It does not see the situation from the student's POV.


Ummm...dude, if I'm against lying, why should this silly little instance be an exception?

[Will Durant]

There's a MAJOR difference between lying that your an FSA vs a student lying on the resume (resume submission deadline being 1 week before exam P date) in order to gain an edge and not have to wait another year or so before the next hiring period.
No, there isn't.
:duh:

[JohnLocke]

A+ Trolling

This thread has been awarded an "A+" rating from the JohnLocke Center for Trolling Excellence

[Will Durant]

Sadly I don't think he's a troll.

[Wigmeister General]

He's part of the generation that feels entitled. :shake:

Once, and for all time, when the whistle blows, the buzzer sounds, the bell rings and the clock strikes, the game is over. Whoever has more points at the moment, wins.

[banpeikun]

So what are the odds that the person who still hasn't taken P as of the resume submission date but wants to put it as a passed exam on his resume is the same as the person who failed P, then tried unsuccessfully to bend the rules of daylight savings time, was unable to take P the next sitting either, and is now waiting for yet another sitting of P which may *gasp* be after a resume submission deadline?

What are the odds that the "one week" time difference is actually a month or more?

What are the odds that described hypothetical resume is already circulating around in certain companies' resume inboxes?

[ElDucky]

You expect someone who hasn't passed P to be able to answer those questions? Get real.

[schizoid]

thanks to you, i'm never hiring anyone from vancouver and/or named gagan

[Gagan]

Ummm...dude, if I'm against lying, why should this silly little instance be an exception?

because it's not the same thing as lying about being an FSA. This is more like taking advantage of a situation or being an opportunist, albeit, it being unethical.

No, there isn't.
:duh:

Of course there is.



Let's put it this way. I did acknowledge that it is dishonest and unethical. Despite this, the question is whether one should do it if the chances of getting caught are slim (ie. see . If it works to one's advantage, one may argue it is worth doing (nothing as big as lying about being an FSA you have got to be kidding me). That's why the whole benefits vs risk issue was brought up. See GooseyGoose's or GraffixMan's responses quoted in my long post on the previous page. If the sole reason you give for not doing this is because it is lying and unethical, then don't respond because this isn't what I'm asking.

The question was not whether this was ethical. Duh it's not.

[Gagan]

thanks to you, i'm never hiring anyone from vancouver and/or named gagan

Like I believe that.
Are you even an employer.

This post should win a stupidity award or something because you're implying here that I am dishonest/unethical. You're implying that I am commiting these acts. Not to mention you're doing this based on a name that you see on a forum.


Enough is enough. Seriously, I'm done. Stop telling me it's unethical. Stop telling me it's lying. Stop accusing me of DOING these things. The main question was whether it was worth taking advantage of a situation like this given that it seemed like the risk of getting caught was quite low.

This is the only reason why I brought up speeding/freeloading food from a buddy at mcdonalds. All things being equal (we're not psychopaths going around killing people or whatever), would it be plausible to take advantage of a situation to give oneself an advantage (even if one has to be dishonest for a bit). I think we all can relate to something like this right? That was why the question was brought up. Constantly saying it is unethical doesn't say anything because I KNOW it's unethical and lying.

[Gagan]

What are the odds that described hypothetical resume is already circulating around in certain companies' resume inboxes?

I really don't know how many of these types of resumes are going around. The students in my class didn't apply to many places (they are still students, they're not looking for work in other cities). There aren't a lot of co-op positions so yeah I'm sure not many are circulating. The last time I applied for a job, I had put down that I was taking P in march.

Now, as for OUTSIDE my school, whether there are other people doing this...that I don't know, but I wouldn't rule it out completely.

Just saying

[ElDucky]

Like I believe that.

This post should win the darwin award or something because you're implying here that I am dishonest/unethical. You're implying that I am commiting these acts. Not to mention you're doing this based on a name that you see on a forum.



Um, I think this is a death threat. Either that or OP doesn't know what the Darwin awards are.

[Roy Hobbs]

I really don't know how many of these types of resumes are going around. The students in my class didn't apply to many places (they are still students, they're not looking for work in other cities). There aren't a lot of co-op positions so yeah I'm sure not many are circulating. The last time I applied for a job, I had put down that I was taking P in march.

Now, as for OUTSIDE my school, whether there are other people doing this...that I don't know, but I wouldn't rule it out completely.

Just saying

I thought you were done with this thread 3 pages ago?

[Lucy]

First and foremost, I'll just say again just to be clear that I have NOT lied on my resume and don't plan to.See, we don't believe you, because you say stuff like this:
Fair enough. I was never offended at the thought of "not getting away" being a possibility. Just didn't appreciate responses that simply say "lying is lying, no matter what you say" or words to that effect. You "don't appreciate it" because it's not the answer you want. It's the right answer to your question. You don't like it because whether or not you've actually lied on your resume you are considering doing it pretty seriously.

And because you say stuff like this:

It's not lying if they don't get caught. An employer can verify by checking the corresponding pass list on the SOA/CAS website. The risk the candidate takes is whether or not the employer chooses to do this. Personally, I'm too risk adverse for such practice. Others may feel different.See, an objective point of view. I appreciate that. ie. Someone who understands WHY a student or w/e MIGHT try to bend the rules by lying (1 week discrepancy again) because it seemed (again, from a student's POV) that the employer wouldn't notice given the pile of resumes/other stuff the employer is busy with. If, in fact, this is not the case, then I appreciate any responses that address that.I don't know if GraffixMan is being facetious or serious, but he's objectively wrong. Lying is lying even if you don't get caught. Check out the definition in any dictionary, being caught is not part of the definition of "lying". It might not be punished, it might "work", it might help you get ahead, but it's still lying. Hey, in Woody Allen's "Crimes and Misdemeanors" the guy gets away with having his difficult mistress killed. She's gone, she no longer threatens his marriage, and he doesn't get caught. It "worked". It was still murder.

(And no, I don't think lying on your resume is in the same category as murder. But both are situations that generally either happened or didn't, and you are trying to make it sound like you are describing a gray area when you are describing a clear-cut lie. If he'd encouraged the mistress to have a few more drinks before driving in the blizzard, or you'd exaggerated the responsibilities of a summer job we'd be talking about gray areas.)

Sadly I don't think he's a troll.
Alas, me neither.

Like I believe that.
Are you even an employer. . . I am. I've done phone screening for interns for the past few years. We're done hiring for the year, but if I notice a "Gagan" out of Vancouver next year I will certain look with caution at that resume.

[Gagan]

That question wasn't directed at you.

Now, allow me to quote my own post since you still don't get it.

Like I believe that.
Enough is enough. Seriously, I'm done. Stop telling me it's unethical. Stop telling me it's lying. Stop accusing me of DOING these things. The main question was whether it was worth taking advantage of a situation like this given that it seemed like the risk of getting caught was quite low.

This is the only reason why I brought up speeding/freeloading food from a buddy at mcdonalds. All things being equal (we're not psychopaths going around killing people or whatever), would it be plausible to take advantage of a situation to give oneself an advantage (even if one has to be dishonest for a bit). I think we all can relate to something like this right? That was why the question was brought up. Constantly saying it is unethical doesn't say anything because I KNOW it's unethical and lying.

Why are you still using the black and white argument. I never said it wasn't lying, nor did I say it was not unethical.

[apk123]

If there is one thing you should take from this thread is that you're not a good fit to this profession. A forum full of actuaries doesn't like you. next. Go sell mortgage backed securities or something.

[Gagan]

I am. I've done phone screening for interns for the past few years. We're done hiring for the year, but if I notice a "Gagan" out of Vancouver next year I will certain look with caution at that resume.

That question wasn't directed at you. But regardless, whatever you decide to do is fine with me. Just be aware that there are lots of Gagan's in Vancouver. Yes, there are > 1 Gagan's in this Actuarial field. So I would hope no discrimination occurs.



Finally, allow me to quote my own post since you still don't get it.

Like I believe that.
Enough is enough. Seriously, I'm done. Stop telling me it's unethical. Stop telling me it's lying. Stop accusing me of DOING these things. The main question was whether it was worth taking advantage of a situation like this given that it seemed like the risk of getting caught was quite low.

This is the only reason why I brought up speeding/freeloading food from a buddy at mcdonalds. All things being equal (we're not psychopaths going around killing people or whatever), would it be plausible to take advantage of a situation to give oneself an advantage (even if one has to be dishonest for a bit). I think we all can relate to something like this right? That was why the question was brought up. Constantly saying it is unethical doesn't say anything because I KNOW it's unethical and lying.

Why are you still using the black and white argument. I never said it wasn't lying, nor did I say it was not unethical.

[Lucy]

. . .Now, allow me to quote my own post since you still don't get it.


Why are you still using the black and white argument. I never said it wasn't lying, nor did I say it was not unethical.I get it.

See, we don't believe you, because you say stuff like this: . . .
You "don't appreciate it" because it's not the answer you want. It's the right answer to your question. You don't like it because whether or not you've actually lied on your resume you are considering doing it pretty seriously.But I'll go away now. I don't think I have anything constructive to add at this point.

[Gagan]

If there is one thing you should take from this thread is that you're not a good fit to this profession. A forum full of actuaries doesn't like you. next. Go sell mortgage backed securities or something.

Yes because this thread is indicative of the skills one needs to perform actuarial duties on the job. Please.

Perhaps this means some of the posters on here aren't a good fit either because they lack reading comprehension skills. How many times have I said that my post was not about whether it IS or ISN'T lying. I KNOW it's lying.


Oh and since some people on here like to jump to conclusions, I don't think this is a good indicator of their ability to be in this profession. :roll:

cheers good night folks
and thanks to those who replied without jumping to conclusions

[dressed up like the Cure]

is there a mat?

[dressed up like the Cure]

Hi just have a question.

Some students from my school who have taken FM already are putting down P as well on their resume when applying for jobs even though they haven't passed P yet. The idea is that after (in a perfect world) getting hired for a summer job or co-op position they will have passed P by then (because they can take in the next month or so and get the result right away).

My question is, is there *really* any problem with this? This is regarding students and summer/coop positions. Not someone who's planning on working F/T for years to come (iono if these should be treated differently).
I know it is morally and ethically wrong, but can someone tell me the truth as to whether there is any harm in this?

Do companies always double check with the SOA to make sure you did indeed pass the exams? I don't recall hearing about employers checking on this? They don't even ask for your score nor do they care, so long as you passed...


any feedback would be appreciated
thanks

Companies do check. The SoA used to send around a list. Do they do that anymore?

[Fourpeat]

Gagan,

There have been so many posts on this topic already so I'll try not to beat a dead horse. However regardless you ask the same question, and that is why you continue to get the same response. People are telling you it's unethical and wrong, which you acknowledge. However what they are saying that you don't understand (or choose not to listen to) is that this should invariably lead you to the conclusion that you shouldn't lie (this is the answer to your question, don't do it, regardless of the potential outcome). Their logic is "lying is wrong, therefore you shouldn't lie." While from what I understand you seem to believe "sure lying is wrong, but if the situation is right, why not?"

I understand your frustration somewhat. People cheat, lie, steal, what not to get by and move up in this world. Be it white lie or scandals, that's unfortunately the way the world works alot of the time. This has alot to do with the relativism (not to get philosophical here) in our society. People have started to view right and wrong in degrees, and think something is ok as long it's only a certain degree, or as long as their not as bad as some other person (in your case, someone who hasn't passed an exam but says he has). However, how things used to be and what the actuarial profession is based on is integrity and moral code that demands absolute standards. There is no such thing as "too honest" in this case. That you believe there is such shows that you are probably an aforementioned relativist (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, depending on how you view it, but in this profession, it is). If you aren't telling a truth, you're telling a lie.

The ends do not justify the means in many cases. Your justification is that by the time the recruiter or whoever reads your resume, your lie will eventually become "truth." However that's not the problem. The problem is that you made a conscious decision at the time of writing your resume to put down something you knew was false. Moreover, if your attitude towards someone who does not put down false information and could possibly miss an opportunity is that they were "too honest" (basically calling them stupid), then that perhaps speaks of your character, and that is what enrages much of the actuarial community here. (My use of the word false here is indeed false, because you are saying at that point in time you have passed. When you read this please don't soothe yourself with words like "technically" false)

My advice is don't pick and choose the advice you want to hear. You've named perhaps 1 or 2 other people who have not disagreed with you "objective and reasonable." It seems as if you want people to relate to you, give you some mental comfort that what you're thinking is ok. BUT, however much one has been tempted to do something that is questionable (which we all have), you will only be respected if you go about doing things the right way, especially on these boards and especially in the actuarial profession.

Now to get on to some happy talk. I like someone's response about writing it in the cover letter. I have heard of a few stories (including my own) and speaking to HR ladies where they ask about your current exam progress given what you've written on your resume. If indeed they see your resume past your planned sitting date, I'm pretty sure they (or you!) would follow up on that, given that something as simple as phone call separates you from the 2 exam candidates. Now if the thought that one phone-call/internet check difference doesn't sit well with you, I'm afraid you're on your own.

With all that said however, I genuinely hope you consider with an open mind the opinions said here without the malintent and hopefully understand the reasoning behind what seems to be nonstop ethical nagging. I wish you all the best.

[apk123]

Ethical sense is a requirement in this profession and I determine that you lack it as it pertains to the profession. :judge: I reserve the right to jump to conclusions when I see fit :judge: next

[GooseyGoose]

is there a mat?

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/18/70384439_ba1fd5b9de.jpg

[Roy Hobbs]

Well said Fourpeat.

I think what most people responded to here was the fact that they feel a lie is a lie, whereas Gagan see this issue as a "technical lie". My advice to you would to be very careful when you convince yourself that it's just a little lie and not that bad.

That's how these things start, next thing you know you mess up on something small at work, lie to cover it up and on it goes. Many big problems in business start off with just a little lie or cover up.

Do yourself a favor and rent the actuarial classic "The Billion Dollar Bubble" the true story of what can happen when you start off with just a little lie.

You may say to yourself that it's just one little lie, nothing wrong with it, you'll never be as bad or bend the truth as much as other people. Most on this board would and have told you to not even go down that road. Even if its "just an internship" its not how you want to start your career.

Are there dishonest actuaries out there? Of course, and many of them eventually find themselves in front of the disciplinary board at some point in their career.

Would you get caught if you went down this road? Maybe or maybe not but each time you bend the rules it makes it that much easier the next time and that's a dangerous road to travel on.

[JMO]

That's how these things start, next thing you know you mess up on something small at work, lie to cover it up and on it goes. Many big problems in business start off with just a little lie or cover up.


Even if the odds favor your getting away with it this time, it's still a bad idea.

A cautionary tale.

A certain person, not an actuary, wanted to take on new responsibilities in a supervisory role. Unfortunately, his employer required a bachelor's degree for such a job title. (Admittedly a stupid requirement, but there it was.) The person, who did have some college courses to his credit, filled in the paperwork with a claim that he had actually graduated from the college he attended. The company failed to check with the college. They gave the person a promotion, and he performed very well. Over the years, he was promoted again and again, until he was made president of the division of the company where he worked.
However, having successfully gotten away with one fib, he would occasionally add to his list of credentials. People would introduce him as a member of a winning basketball team, and suddenly you would see "winning basketball team" on his company bio. For some reason, this was not challenged. Then disaster struck. An olympic medal was added to the list of accomplishments, and the local sportswriter decided to undertake some investigative journalism.
The whole sordid story came out, all the way back to the college degree he didn't have. The company was forced to fire him, with a blaze of publicity about the importance of integrity.

This is a true story. "Govern yourself accordingly."

[PrincessPenelope]

The thing as well that it is not just within in the actuary profession. Another cuationary tale:

My husband, after begging for some help, finally got the approval to hire an assistant. Someone with at least a 2 year degree in engineering science, maybe a junior in college working part time during the year and full time in the summers. One of his fellow co-workers based out of a different office told him about this guy that was a family friend and happened to work in the same company as me (he used to work in th QA department.) My husband asked me if I knew him and I said yeah and I told him that even though he was older than what he was looking for (he was really thinking of getting a college junior and then hoping the kid would like it enough and stay there after graduation) and he had worked in insurance for 4 years he seemed like a smart guy that will catch on quick. So they called him in for an interview. They even accomodated the guy and had it at like 5PM. They liked him and were ready to offer him a position, until they looked at his application. He wrote down that he was making over 60K a year. The head underwritter in the like company make like 65K, and ASA with 4 years made less than 60K and this guy, a QA tester, came up with a number. My husband knew it was lie immediately because people talk. It really is a small world. My husband didn't want to hire him because he is the engineer and would be responsible for this guy. He could not trust him. My guess is the guy was making about 35K-40K, and the salary for this job was between 45K-50K and way better perks.

Another one (and this one proves that you are not being an idiot by being ethical/honest):
My first job was in engineering and I was kind of a floater (did a bit of everything). Structures was my expertise but I would help out in what I could. One Friday some drawings needed to go out and there were not that many people around. The project had to do with pipes and drainage. I was helping by folding drawings until one of the PEs pulled me aside and told me to photoshop this number because he didn't know how to do it. I asked him if he was stamping the drawing and he said no. I asked him if he had calculations to show me and he said no. So I told him I couldn't do that. This guy was a professional engineer and he was telling me to do something shady. He yelled at me and told me that I needed to do it, because he had to take the drawings to the owner about 2 hours away so that they can get submitted first thing monday. I told him I couldn't do it and even talked another one of my co-workers not to do it. I never saw someone so mad in my life. I really thought I was going to get fired that Monday when the owner came back. On monday the owner was mad at me, because in the story he heard, I was being a ***** and costing the company money. However, when I told him what happened he sided with me. Let's just say the other guy doesn't work there anymore and was kind of forced into retirement, and the owner trusts me and my judgement. I still get phonecalls when people from my alma matter apply there and if I needed a job...it really is a phonecall away.

And the last one (once again to prove it's a small world):
Went to college with a guy who got caught cheating on one of his final. He had to retake the course and he has a degree. Usually only a handfull of people would know...right? Nope. The department has a list of incidents available to professors/staff. People forget that professors and staff are people with connections. Went on a date with a guy that tought a couple of course and he told me about it...just like that. Went to a St. Pattys day party at one of the professors home. One alum asked the professor about this applicant (the cheater), and the professor told him, right there in front of maybe 5 other engineers that one day may come across his resume. People talk.

[Kenny]

Gagan, thank you for entertaining me this morning.

I don't want to pile-on so I'll just say that perhaps you need to reevaluate the responses you got rather than getting pissy about it and *****ing that they aren't helpful. Despite the multitude of trolls on this board there are plenty of helpful people, even in this thread and even if you don't like what they told you.

[Old Timer]

The simple answer to all of this is that we are actuaries. That means we love the details. There is almost no chance that we would miss the discrepancy. I only say almost since I can't speak for every actuary. However, I would guess the odds of getting aweay with this are slim at best.

[Ginormous76]

Even if the odds favor your getting away with it this time, it's still a bad idea.

A cautionary tale.

A certain person, not an actuary, wanted to take on new responsibilities in a supervisory role. Unfortunately, his employer required a bachelor's degree for such a job title. (Admittedly a stupid requirement, but there it was.) The person, who did have some college courses to his credit, filled in the paperwork with a claim that he had actually graduated from the college he attended. The company failed to check with the college. They gave the person a promotion, and he performed very well. Over the years, he was promoted again and again, until he was made president of the division of the company where he worked.
However, having successfully gotten away with one fib, he would occasionally add to his list of credentials. People would introduce him as a member of a winning basketball team, and suddenly you would see "winning basketball team" on his company bio. For some reason, this was not challenged. Then disaster struck. An olympic medal was added to the list of accomplishments, and the local sportswriter decided to undertake some investigative journalism.
The whole sordid story came out, all the way back to the college degree he didn't have. The company was forced to fire him, with a blaze of publicity about the importance of integrity.

This is a true story. "Govern yourself accordingly."

I know who this is, but the name is escaping me. Please remind me.

[Ginormous76]

is there a mat?

You beat me to it.

[Ginormous76]

Yes because this thread is indicative of the skills one needs to perform actuarial duties on the job. Please.

It's indicative of the fact that you can't accept wrong as wrong and think that sometimes it's right to be wrong. Yes, you said you weren't doing it. However, you aren't accepting that it's always wrong which logic follows that you aren't all that honest of a person yourself.

[Dahlia]

Even if the odds favor your getting away with it this time, it's still a bad idea.

A cautionary tale.
An olympic medal was added to the list of accomplishments, and the local sportswriter decided to undertake some investigative journalism.


I can't believe someone would lie about winning an olympic medal. Incredible!

[MG]

I know who this is, but the name is escaping me. Please remind me.

Per my Google search, there is a gentleman named William Simms who is a possibility.

http://www.marquetinternational.com/liars.htm#Simms

[banpeikun]

Maybe one day Gagan's profile will grace that page and we can see what he looks like.

[Bored]

because it's not the same thing as lying about being an FSA. This is more like taking advantage of a situation or being an opportunist, albeit, it being unethical.


Your parents did a crappy job of raising you if you really believe this. Almost everyone in this thread is trying to teach you morality -- based on how you're not getting anything, it's too late for you, apparently.

[Passacaglia]

hmm

but what if you say you passed P, ex. today is Feb 25, and you're taking P March 12th. So you apply for a bunch of jobs and on your resume you stated that you passed P. Come march 12th you DO pass P and get an unofficial pass (which pretty much is a guarantee that you did pass). So now you're not really lying right?



See this is what I mean. Can people not read? If you can't comprehend the scenario that was presented in the original post (and my last post) then seriously don't reply. It's not a case of "lying" on the resume. You're using the word "lie" as if the person is boldly saying they passed 3 exams even when they really only passed 1 and it would be OBVIOUS and easy for the company to find out.




Perhaps this means some of the posters on here aren't a good fit either because they lack reading comprehension skills. How many times have I said that my post was not about whether it IS or ISN'T lying. I KNOW it's lying.



If you say so.

I'm going to say that you shouldn't be an actuary, not because of your ethics, but because you fail to realize that words have exact meanings. To me, this shows a lack of atention to detail (http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_discussion_forum/showpost.php?p=440963&postcount=99).

It's not like I'm really a "killer" -- it was just one person I killed, not six (or nine if you're in the CAS).

[Will Durant]

You're using the word "lie" as if the person is boldly saying they passed 3 exams even when they really only passed 1 and it would be OBVIOUS and easy for the company to find out.
lie (noun) obviously false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive when it would be easy to find out the truth

[gyli]

I can't believe we're still on this issue.

I thought we've already reached a consensus that lying on your resume in any shape or form is never acceptable under any circumstances. So, why are we still on this issue? Move on, people. Stop beating the dead horse....

[MountainHawk]

Yes because this thread is indicative of the skills one needs to perform actuarial duties on the job. Please.

Perhaps this means some of the posters on here aren't a good fit either because they lack reading comprehension skills. How many times have I said that my post was not about whether it IS or ISN'T lying. I KNOW it's lying.


Oh and since some people on here like to jump to conclusions, I don't think this is a good indicator of their ability to be in this profession. :roll:

cheers good night folks
and thanks to those who replied without jumping to conclusions
This will (hopefully) be my final post on this subject.

Do actuaries need to be good at math, understand statistics, and be effective communicators to be good actuaries?

Yes, of course they do. They are key skills.

But the most important "skill" an actuary has is ethical standards. Do you know how easy it is (and sadly, all too common) for a hurricane to cost a company $8M in income, and the reserving actuary is pressured/decides that a long tail line like WC all of a sudden needs $8M less reserves to balance out that loss. Moving a $400M WC reserve is easy, and would pretty easily pass basic peer review. It's still a reasonable reserve, in fact, but the actuary allowed his best estimate to be affect by facts that don't matter, and it in the long run the company and policyholders are worse off for it.

If you can't uphold high ethical standards, then you will fail as an actuary. You might pass the exams, you might get paid a lot of money, but you will not advance the credibility of the profession that helped you get those things.

[Quasi]

I can't believe we're still on this issue.

I thought we've already reached a consensus that lying on your resume in any shape or form is never acceptable under any circumstances. So, why are we still on this issue? Move on, people. Stop beating the dead horse....

You get it. Yes, we have reached a consensus but the op still doesn't get it.

By just asking the question of whether or not lying in this way is a problem he proves that he doesn't get it. It is a no-brainer to anyone with ethics.

[Gagan]

Nope, I was just presenting a viewpoint. Instead of taking the "lying is lying no matter what just don't ever do it" viewpoint (as politicians, head actuaries, doctors, etc. may say in a public statement) I took the "well, depends on the circumstances, if you most likely won't get caught and it's not really something big or something that harms others, then you might consider it..." viewpoint which I guarantee lots of people have, it's just that professors, doctors, politicians, athletes' words are scrutinized by the public so they have to speak in absolute terms and not leave anything open to interpretation.

An example? On a popular (canadian) forum, there's a sub-section that was called the "Police Forum" where officers (current/ retired) answer your questions. The question was about people hogging the left lane on a highway yet they are going the speed limit (they are failing to keep right, and let faster vehicles pass in the left lane which is "the" passing lane). the question was whether one should pass them on the right.

The response? The officer gave 2 responses: the "legal" response was no you can't pass, because they are going the speed limit and so if you pass you are exceeding the limit. The second response was the "realistic" response which was just pass them on the right.

Similarly in a different topic the question was about speeding (50 km/h limit in cities). The officers even recommend that you should drive at the speed of the traffic flow (which is usually 10-15 above the limit) because it's safer.

When I have a kid, am I gonna tell him to drive at 50 AT ALL TIMES just so he's not considered "speeding?" NO. Anyone who tells me they don't speed should be burned at the stake, I'm sorry but that's just not possible. I would tell my son realistically, just go with traffic flow, usually 60-65 km/h. That's the TRUTH, it's safer that way, and as long as you're in the middle of the pack, not the lead or last car, you won't get ticketed (if THAT even happens). That's the TRUTH.

That's why I was asking this from the viewpoint of the students. Now you see why I hate responses that say "lying is lying" without taking the scenario into account. THIS does NOT mean I don't agree with responses that say "don't do it". There have been many responses that said that, but at least it showed they read the post instead of throwing a canned line that politicians under public scrutiny would say.

So yeah, I was playing the devil's advocate (but only through the viewpoint of the students in my school). I mean I understand (thanks to many posts) about the RISK vs BENEFITS, how it's a small community, etc.

So yeah DONT LIE ON YOUR RESUME. I get it. I got it since post 150 in this thread (page 15 on default forum view). I conceded that, in truth, only a few people gave lame responses whereas a majority's were helpful. It was my mistake to get pissed over those few lame 'canned' responses. So yeah I apologized on post #150. Everything after that was just people egging me on.

So in this scenario, even though I may have the viewpoint of assessing risk vs benefits, I know that it's not worth it. I actually showed those students this topic and I'm confident they won't do it again. All I'm saying is that humans aren't 100% honest all the time. That's all, and some people seem to think you have to be 100% honest all the time. SOMETIMES it's better to be dishonest. In this particular scenario, it's NOT though. But some people seem to think that it's disgraceful to even THINK of this. We're all humans.

[Gagan]

Btw, about that olympic medal post...

What a retard....

I may not be 100% honest all the time (EVERY SINGLE person on this forum is the same), but I would never be so stupid as to lie about a bachelor's degree (I might consider it if I were desperate but then come to the conclusion that it's just plain dumb). Lying about a medal? lol yeah.....deserve it.

Btw just for the record in case some people try to (unsuccessfully) catch me by saying "lying about a bachelor's to get a job is just like what you posted about".

My preemptive response to that is NO it's not the same. Remember this was about a 1 week difference. Employer sees your resume, sees that "you've passed" and in fact YOU DID pass (assuming all goes well). This is vs a Bachelor's, there's no 1 week difference, if you want to get a bachelor's before the employer sees your resume...welll that's gonna be hard. So yeah don't try to throw that at me. The only reason I posted was cause the 1 week window made (or seemed to) the RISK low.

Again, I'm not suggesting anything, that's just a preemptive response. Everything has been said in my previous post above.

cheers

[ElDucky]

Oy. Speeding is still speeding, but it may not be the wrong thing to do. Lying is always lying, but it may not be the wrong the thing to do. In the case of your resume it is the wrong thing to do.

[Gagan]

No no I agree. Post #150 should've ended this.
I was (wrongly) accusing a majority of the people for giving canned responses, when in reality, most actually addressed the issue of risk vs benefits (in the particular scenario) and not seem to think it's disgraceful to do the human thing of taking opportunities to do things to your advantage. I apologized for that. Everything afterwards should be ignored (my responses were to those who decided to challenge me again). That's all.

[nizzi]

lying about a bachelor's to get a job is just like what you posted about, bro

[Gagan]

I'm still amazed that one would lie about an olympic medal...
If you *must* lie (not judging) , you still have to know when to stop.

[capricho]

I KNOW it's unethical and lying.

Classy!

[Darkness Falls]

I think thread really calls for this towards the OP

http://images.despair.com/products/demotivators/cluelessness.jpg

[Sleepy Head]

A cautionary tale.

A certain person, not an actuary, wanted to take on new responsibilities in a supervisory role. Unfortunately, his employer required a bachelor's degree for such a job title. (Admittedly a stupid requirement, but there it was.) The person, who did have some college courses to his credit, filled in the paperwork with a claim that he had actually graduated from the college he attended. The company failed to check with the college. They gave the person a promotion, and he performed very well. Over the years, he was promoted again and again, until he was made president of the division of the company where he worked.
However, having successfully gotten away with one fib, he would occasionally add to his list of credentials. People would introduce him as a member of a winning basketball team, and suddenly you would see "winning basketball team" on his company bio. For some reason, this was not challenged. Then disaster struck. An olympic medal was added to the list of accomplishments, and the local sportswriter decided to undertake some investigative journalism.
The whole sordid story came out, all the way back to the college degree he didn't have. The company was forced to fire him, with a blaze of publicity about the importance of integrity.

This is a true story. "Govern yourself accordingly."

I know who you are talking about. Good real-life example.

[SooMe]

Gagan reasons like a true systems thinker.

[Lucy]

Gagan reasons like a true systems thinker.

:lol:

[Lucy]

Oh, and Gagan, I agree with you. I find it incomprehensible that someone would like about an Olympic medal. Lying when you will almost certainly be caught is bizarre, and suggests the guy had some other problems in addition to dishonesty.

[JMO]

I'm still amazed that one would lie about an olympic medal...
If you *must* lie (not judging) , you still have to know when to stop.
The time to stop is before the FIRST lie. After that, the slope can be very slippery.

[JMO]

Oh, and Gagan, I agree with you. I find it incomprehensible that someone would like about an Olympic medal. Lying when you will almost certainly be caught is bizarre, and suggests the guy had some other problems in addition to dishonesty.

It may seem bizarre, but you have to see it in context. He had gotten away with so many "truth enhancements" over the years, just one more wasn't a big deal. Early on he made claims about his college basketball career, which tied in with the lie about graduating from said college. Remarkably, nobody bothered to check on that, either.

[Will Durant]

Heard on the Bert Show this morning...

Person claimed a BA on their resume when they had (at most) AA, and made up a company for which they claimed to have been Marketing Director. This morning they're being called to a meeting with HR and their supervisor and told to "bring their resume."

Made me think of this thread although I understand that this is completely different because this is an actual lie unlike the scenario that Gagan was proposing.

[GooseyGoose]

Does red font mean you admit you were wrong and are just highlighting your change in viewpoint for others to see?

[MountainHawk]

Does red font mean you admit you were wrong and are just highlighting your change in viewpoint for others to see?
red font = sarcasm on the AO.

[banpeikun]

Does red font mean you admit you were wrong and are just highlighting your change in viewpoint for others to see?:rofl:

[JMO]

:rofl:
:lolup: Goosey should have used red font.

[Gagan]

Heard on the Bert Show this morning...

Person claimed a BA on their resume when they had (at most) AA, and made up a company for which they claimed to have been Marketing Director. This morning they're being called to a meeting with HR and their supervisor and told to "bring their resume."

Made me think of this thread although I understand that this is completely different because this is an actual lie unlike the scenario that Gagan was proposing.

Yes it's different. And it's obvious that this is HUGE compared to lying because of a '1 week' difference which might look like it could go unnoticed (this was the motive for the lie).
Claiming a BA when one doesn't have it (it's not like you're gonna get ur BA in 1 week), making up a fake company with a fake position in the company?

The difference was that the students were taking advantage of a small window of error (1 week, and from their POV, it most likely will go unnoticed). Yes both are lying, but they are different scenarios. I may have been unsuccessful in explaining what I mean (using words like 'not really lying' etc) but I did state it clearly in one of the previous posts that YES they are both lying. Yes they are both unethical.

Yes, excellent, using sarcasm to attack one of my earlier posts, when the later ones have cleared any confusion. Awesome move. Gave me a good laugh.

[cromdalekid]

Gagan, you're way too sensitive. If you can't handle AO, how are you gonna deal with jokes/pranks in the office?

[1695814]

Gagan, you're way too sensitive. If you can't handle AO, how are you gonna deal with jokes/pranks in the office?I'm having a hard enough time dealing with your dancing avatar. :spnner:

[JohnLocke]

YES they are both lying. Yes they are both unethical.



So what do you want from us then?

[GooseyGoose]

Hey guys, in all seriousness, what's the password to the reef? Is that an admin only board?

[JohnLocke]

Hey guys, in all seriousness, what's the password to the reef? Is that an admin only board?

PM sent.

[Gagan]

Gagan, you're way too sensitive. If you can't handle AO, how are you gonna deal with jokes/pranks in the office?

Nono I'm not sensitive. I'm a prankster myself and always enjoy a good laugh.
I guess it's more I find it funny how when you post something, and state it clearly, people still misonstrue what you write. Then again, this is life. But I expected more from actuaries/prospective actuaries on AO.

And as for the question JohnLocke. I don't want anything. I'm sure you've noticed in my previous posts I have stated that I was done. It's lying, unethical, I acknowledged that. Remember I was only presenting a viewpoint. Every post after that was just to answer those ignorant folks who still can't seem to interpret what I wrote properly. Again, I guess I was a little surprised that on a forum full of actuaries and prospective actuaries, there are some people who can't seem to read. Or perhaps they read one paragraph, then when they go on to the second, they forget what they read in the first and go back to accusing me of being the one who's lying on my resume when I have not.

Overall, I enjoyed it. I mean I like a good argument/conflict on a forum. Gives me something to do in between breaks. Student life would otherwise be too boring from working part-time, studying for midterms/exams, studying for actuarial exams. Occasional hangouts are fun, but obviously aren't something one in my position would do everyday.

cheers

[Kenny]

Again, I guess I was a little surprised that on a forum full of actuaries and prospective actuaries, there are some people who can't seem to read.

I hope you are including yourself in this because you see mto have missed the point of about 90% of the posts in this thread.

[banpeikun]

I hope you are including yourself and only yourself in this because you see mto have missed the point of about 90% of the posts in this thread.
IFYP

[banpeikun]

Btw, Gagan is king of the "I am not posting anymore" post followed by 50478190851 posts.

[Gagan]

I hope you are including yourself in this because you see mto have missed the point of about 90% of the posts in this thread.

Show me how I missed the point? I said many times yes it's unethical, yes it's dishonest.

Going back the previous few pages, and also including banpeikun's attack in the other thread, it's clear that other people can't read.
Everything after post 150 as I stated, was in response to lame attacks on me. Seeing as you responded like that, I guess you would be one of those who, if you see me running a stale yellow light, you would extrapolate this to running over a pedestrian in an example to state how wrong I was since both are breaking the law.

[Lucy]

Show me how I missed the point? I said many times yes it's unethical, yes it's dishonest.

Going back the previous few pages, and also including banpeikun's attack in the other thread, it's clear that other people can't read.
Everything after post 150 as I stated, was in response to lame attacks on me. Seeing as you responded like that, I guess you would be one of those who, if you see me running a stale yellow light, you would extrapolate this to running over a pedestrian in an example to state how wrong I was since both are breaking the law.
Naw, that's not a good comparison to the exam thing. A better comparison is that your friends are willing to run a red light at night when they can't see anyone, but not during the day when there's a cop within sight. Both are equally illegal but there's a good chance of getting away with one and almost no chance of getting away with the other.

[Gagan]

I'm not gonna argue about this. But you have a point in that if I'm advocating running red lights at night when nobody is around, then the person taking a shot at me using running a red light in broad daylight in front of a cop as an example clearly doesn't know what he/she is talking about (banpeikun). It makes no sense to link the two if you're trying to use this to attack someone. You would expect banpeikun to realize this by now and that his shot at me made no sense, but he'll probably come up with something lame like "both are lies" as only he can.

[banpeikun]

I'm not gonna argue about this.More lies. And you still don't get it.

[Gagan]

Lucy said "nah that's not a good comparison", I said "I'm not gonna argue about this" and I didn't. I basically used her example. No lies there.

And it looks like you don't get it. I put this issue to rest since post #150 in this thread, idiots after that still accuse me of lying or whatever lame excuse they come up with, I defend myself. You bring up a dumb irrelevant example in a different thread to indirectly attack me, I merely point out how that example made no sense. You then defend your own lame example because you somehow think it's relevant. I don't know, I don't care whether my previous post (using Lucy's example) made sense to you or not. Chances are you probably still don't get it.

Or perhaps by telling me I don't get it, you're saying I don't understand what ethics/honesty is? I've stated that I was just presenting a viewpoint. IF that's what you meant by "you still don't get it", well, I've put the issue to rest saying I know that it is dishonest, and unethical. duh.

Good night.
Final post in this thread. No sense arguing with someone who can't read.

[Quasi]

Nono I'm not sensitive. I'm a prankster myself and always enjoy a good laugh.
I guess it's more I find it funny how when you post something, and state it clearly, people still misonstrue what you write. Then again, this is life. But I expected more from actuaries/prospective actuaries on AO.

And as for the question JohnLocke. I don't want anything. I'm sure you've noticed in my previous posts I have stated that I was done. It's lying, unethical, I acknowledged that. Remember I was only presenting a viewpoint. Every post after that was just to answer those ignorant folks who still can't seem to interpret what I wrote properly. Again, I guess I was a little surprised that on a forum full of actuaries and prospective actuaries, there are some people who can't seem to read. Or perhaps they read one paragraph, then when they go on to the second, they forget what they read in the first and go back to accusing me of being the one who's lying on my resume when I have not.

Overall, I enjoyed it. I mean I like a good argument/conflict on a forum. Gives me something to do in between breaks. Student life would otherwise be too boring from working part-time, studying for midterms/exams, studying for actuarial exams. Occasional hangouts are fun, but obviously aren't something one in my position would do everyday.

cheers

You're still not going to get it, but I'm bored so I'll try one more time.

The reason everyone is jumping on you is that you asked the question in the first place. It would be like asking "my friends are planning on breaking into a house and stealing some stuff. there's very little chance of getting caught because we know that the family is out of town for weeks. they have insurance so it wouldn't hurt the family that much. what do you think, sounds like a good risk/reward." The only reason you could see to not lie about exams was the possibility of getting caught. It was obvious from the first post that you had no problem with lying as long as the chance of getting caught was remote, and the reward from lying was there.

Say whatever you want to now, but the mere fact that you thought there was a question tells everything we need to know about your morals. You can't get out of it now so you might was well stop arguing. But we all know you won't ;) You can say now that you know it's dishonest and that you won't do it, but the fact that you didn't know it was a no-brainer without asking the question is why no one believes you. Fine, so you now know that everyone thinks lying on your resume is a BAAAAD idea.....the fact that you didn't know it was a bad idea all by yourself is the issue.

[Kenny]

Show me how I missed the point? I said many times yes it's unethical, yes it's dishonest.

Going back the previous few pages, and also including banpeikun's attack in the other thread, it's clear that other people can't read.
Everything after post 150 as I stated, was in response to lame attacks on me. Seeing as you responded like that, I guess you would be one of those who, if you see me running a stale yellow light, you would extrapolate this to running over a pedestrian in an example to state how wrong I was since both are breaking the law.:lol:

[Kenny]

I'm going to disagree with Quasi. I think this is the point of most of the posts.

you might was well stop arguing. But we all know you won't ;) .

Some people are being nice and trying to help you. Others, like me, are enjoying the entertainment. Although I guess posting this puts me in the first category now.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

Overall, I enjoyed it. I mean I like a good argument/conflict on a forum. Gives me something to do in between breaks. Student life would otherwise be too boring from working part-time, studying for midterms/exams, studying for actuarial exams.
Um, "in between breaks" are when you are supposed to be working or studying or attending classes.
Just an FYI.

[Sleepy Head]

Say whatever you want to now, but the mere fact that you thought there was a question tells everything we need to know about your morals. You can't get out of it now so you might was well stop arguing. But we all know you won't ;) You can say now that you know it's dishonest and that you won't do it, but the fact that you didn't know it was a no-brainer without asking the question is why no one believes you. Fine, so you now know that everyone thinks lying on your resume is a BAAAAD idea.....the fact that you didn't know it was a bad idea all by yourself is the issue.

ITA. This is how I see it as well. But the situation is hopeless, IMO.

[enyj]

At the first 6 pages, I was sympathetic...
After that, I am confused..

What is it that you actually plan to know from this thread?
You said you know that it is unethical.. Yes.. Got that

You said you need to know the risk v benefit? By knowing that, what is it that you plan to achieve? Does it help in the job application? Why a need to quantify that ends justify your means?

You said that you wanted to know the process. Why would circumventing the system or playing the game to get ahead be an important factor in doing something unethical? Why does not getting caught be your major factor in deciding that this would then justify the action?

You then said... you don't want anything? Then why start this in the first place? ><


Sincerely yours,
Confused

[Old Timer]

I already gave the ultimate answer, but here goes again.

Regardless of what is ethical or not, Gagan wants to know the odds of getting caught. Let's simply deal with this question for now. The rest of the thread deals with ethics and the whether something is a lie or not.

We are actuaries. We live for the details. I would say the odds of getting caught is very high. If I had to quantify it, I'd put it about 85% chance of being caught. We are anal about details. That is all.

[Passacaglia]

I already gave the ultimate answer, but here goes again.

This should come at the beginning every time someone posts in a thread for the second time.

[Old Timer]

You may be onto something, there.

[rrbest]

If you were going to pay someone $5000 a year for having a credential, would you check if the credential was legit?

[JohnLocke]

If you were going to pay someone $5000 a year for having a credential, would you check if the credential was legit?

Difference between no exams and fellowship is a lot more than that. Just exam raises (from nothing to fellowship) could account for 35k difference easily.

[rrbest]

Well yeah, that's what I was getting at. I put each exams value at $5K a year

[success_will_write]

On a resume, how important is it to distinguish between :qunq:passing:qunq: an exam and receiving a :qunq:preliminary pass:qunq: on an exam? I received a preliminary pass at the testing center yesterday and I'd really like to put that extra exam on my updated resume but don't want to be a liar... there is after all a non-negative probability that I failed. According to BeAnActuary.org, that probability is about 1/26,000 or something.

[Darkness Falls]

On a resume, how important is it to distinguish between :qunq:passing:qunq: an exam and receiving a :qunq:preliminary pass:qunq: on an exam? I received a preliminary pass at the testing center yesterday and I'd really like to put that extra exam on my updated resume but don't want to be a liar... there is after all a non-negative probability that I failed. According to BeAnActuary.org, that probability is about 1/26,000 or something.

Exam Passed
P - Fall 2008
FM - May 2009 (Preliminary Pass)

No problems that way.

[success_will_write]

Yea that's what I was thinking. One time an actuary I asked to critique my resume didn't know what preliminary pass meant, so I would prefer not to use that phrase on my res. But I also don't want to be a liar. That's why I was looking for a bit of input. :shrug:

[rrbest]

Even a non-actuary should know what preliminary means. If you really wanted to avoid confusion, I don't think it would be wrong to simply put pass. 1/26000 is statistically insignificant. I'd still vote (Preliminary Pass) though, because that is what is it and if your hiring manager doesn't know what a preliminary pass is then god bless him and your employment at that firm.

[success_will_write]

Even a non-actuary should know what preliminary means. If you really wanted to avoid confusion, I don't think it would be wrong to simply put pass. 1/26000 is statistically insignificant. I'd still vote (Preliminary Pass) though, because that is what is it and if your hiring manager doesn't know what a preliminary pass is then god bless him and your employment at that firm.

good point, lol

now that I think about it, the guy who didn't know what preliminary pass meant is semi-retired...:oops:

[Kenshiro]

It's a bit naive to think credentialed actuaries all keep up with the early exams. Do you realize how often the systems change?

I'm sure someone at the employer will know what it means, but if you interview with any older actuaries, they'll probably ask about it. It doesn't seem like a big deal.

[ElDucky]

is semi-retired...:oops:

I read this differently at first. Anyway...

My boss doesn't keep up the exams because I do and he can just ask me if he needs to know something.

Also, just to nit pick, it is a non zero probability, not a non negative probability.

[success_will_write]

Any event that has a non-negative probability of occurring can still happen. That's all I meant. For example, in a truly infinite universe, some event with probability zero still occurs an infinite number of times. Tho that point was probably destroyed by my including the (non-negative and non-zero) probability of 1/26,000.

[Kenshiro]

Any event that has a non-negative probability of occurring can still happen. That's all I meant. For example, in a truly infinite universe, some event with probability zero still occurs an infinite number of times. Tho that point was probably destroyed by my including the (non-negative and non-zero) probability of 1/26,000.

:shake:

Be sure to bring up that logic if you get an interview.

[Buck Chambers]

Any event that has a non-negative probability of occurring can still happen. That's all I meant. For example, in a truly infinite universe, some event with probability zero still occurs an infinite number of times. Tho that point was probably destroyed by my including the (non-negative and non-zero) probability of 1/26,000.
If this post is not a joke, please turn in your actuary card at the door and find yourself another career.

[success_will_write]

At this point I don't have an actuary card. :D And it was a joke - I make jokes about the occurrence of unlikely events by saying that the probability is non-negative.

Now, that said, if you have read this book (http://www.amazon.com/Infinite-Book-Boundless-Timeless-Endless/dp/0375422277) and you respect the opinion of this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Barrow) then you will agree that an event with probability zero still occurs an infinite number of times in an infinite universe.

[ADoubleDot]

What is the occurence of an event that has negative probability in this realm?