View Single Post
Old 08-24-2018, 11:50 AM
tbakos's Avatar
tbakos tbakos is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SW Colorado looking South towards the San Juan Mountains
College: IIT Graduate - Math, English, Philosophy
Favorite beer: Fat Tire (or, maybe a bottle of wine) - And Lots of It during these hard times we are now going through!
Posts: 2,137

Originally Posted by IPAfan View Post

Congratulations on your successful petition road to the ballot.

Your consistent openness and honesty are refreshing. You were open enough a few years ago to share with us on AO the SOA’s letter of explanation as to why the nominating committee refused to endorse you. I tried searching for that post of yours but cannot find it.

It would be helpful to this year’s voters, I think, to remind us of the SOA’s feedback to you at that time and your comments thereon. The SOA cited a “refusal to accept or support decisions reached by a majority,” “a lack of understanding of your role as a fiduciary and the legal responsibilities of a member of the Board,” and “unwillingness to respect the obligations of confidentiality” during your Board years. There was also the nominating committee’s assertion that you were “more interested in critiquing [their] questions and the questioners than in answering the questions,” and the committee claimed you “refused to answer substantive questions and obstructed the process.”

Can you provide a link to (or re-post) that feedback once again, and also to your responses?
I'm not sure I could find that.

I've been working towards getting on the ballot as a President-Elect candidate since 2010 - this is the 8th year and I made it.

The Petition Process was created, I am sure, in response to complaints the SoA heard from members that they ought to be able to actually exercise their right to nominate. Although making it through the Petition Process to the ballot is more arduous than it ought to be, it is possible and it does make the Nominating Committee irrelevant. So, there is no point in being concerned about the NC decision making process any more. I believe the material you referenced came from before the Petition Process was instituted - pre 2014.

What requires our attention now are ways to improve the Petition Process so it is more welcoming to all members who believe they have something to contribute - or - apply it equally to all candidates - even those proposed by the Nominating Committee. Personally, I like, perhaps, an improved version of the first/second ballot system we used in the past and which produced some very accomplished leadership.

We've had a couple of Petition Candidates elected already. Jim Glickman begins his presidential year in October. There are, besides me, two Board Petition candidates this year. ELECT us all. We have demonstrated a very strong desire to serve the actuarial profession. We are patient, persistent, and determined - all signs, I think, of leadership qualities you ought to be looking for.

Here's the thing: It is almost like in the SoA we have created two "parties" - Endorsed & Petition. The Endorsed candidates are the candidates of the current administration. The Petition candidates, because they get to the ballot (this year) with the assent of 600 plus member "nominations", are the candidates of the membership, that is, the "peoples" party. I almost think Petition candidates have an advantage.

What do you think?

Tom Bakos, FSA, MAAA
Served as SOA Board member: 2002 - 2005 and (as VP) 2008 - 2010
Reply With Quote
Page generated in 0.16042 seconds with 9 queries