Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > General Actuarial
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Meet the Employees of DW Simpson
Patty Jacobsen Simpson, Bob Morand, Kristyn Sakelaris, Sean Loboda, KC Cho, Maureen Matous, Ellen Page
Aaron Benton, Becki Tobia, Kimberly Skora, Margit Vogele, Barclay Burns, Jason Blundy, Dan Karrow, Tom Troceen
Valorie Mulder, Marianne Westphal, Carol Lee, Jennifer Retford, Kieran Welsh-Phillips, Lindsey Nelson, Emily Paxton
Angie Wachholz, Derek Mulder, Julie Garwood, Caitlin Cunningham, David Benton, Dave Retford, Sarah Cleveland, Rhonda Glick
Genevieve Shannon, Meghan Bautista, Carol Datu, Barb Rave, Jesus Perez, Dan Kane, Chris Zdenek, Scott Simon, Kriss Wells


General Actuarial Non-Specific Actuarial Topics - Before posting a thread, please browse over our other sections to see if there is a better fit, such as Careers - Employment, Actuarial Science Universities Forum or any of our other 100+ forums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-21-2008, 11:18 AM
Lucy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default AAA wants to remove the experience requirement

So it looks like the AAA wants to remove its experience requirement for membership,and just rely on the experience requirement for qualification (which is much less public information.) Personally, I think this is a really bad idea. I don't see any special benefit in admitting ASAs with fewer than 3 years of experience, the MAAA requirement means little enough as it is, and I presume that as a member of the SoA (or CAS, or whatever) these people are already required to maintain professional standards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by email from AAA
Members asked to approve proposed bylaw changes
Next month, Academy members will be asked to vote on two bylaw changes by the Board of Directors. The Board recommends these changes for approval.
In the first change, the Board is asking members to eliminate the redundancy in the current membership requirements that Academy members have three years' experience. The new Qualification Standards include an experience requirement which the Board believes better serves the Academy's mission. This change will also allow the Academy to invite all newly credentialed associates to join.
In the second change, the Board is asking for discretion to determine when dues waivers are appropriate, in light of the profession's evolving demographics and work patterns.
The following link takes you to the proposed bylaw changes themselves: http://www.actuary.org/pdf/academy/bylaws_july08.pdf.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-21-2008, 11:47 AM
Will Durant
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Couple this with the CIA proposal to grant ASAs pretty much by college credit, and
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-21-2008, 11:49 AM
Convicted Felon's Avatar
Convicted Felon Convicted Felon is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Studying for CAS5,CAS6,CAS7,CAS8,CAS9
Favorite beer: please do not mock my preference for Dos Equis
Posts: 18
Wink

Might increases due's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucy View Post
So it looks like the AAA wants to remove its experience requirement for membership,and just rely on the experience requirement for qualification (which is much less public information.) Personally, I think this is a really bad idea. I don't see any special benefit in admitting ASAs with fewer than 3 years of experience, the MAAA requirement means little enough as it is, and I presume that as a member of the SoA (or CAS, or whatever) these people are already required to maintain professional standards.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-21-2008, 12:40 PM
Bama Sampler's Avatar
Bama Sampler Bama Sampler is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 14
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Durant View Post
Couple this with the CIA proposal to grant ASAs pretty much by college credit, and
Will that have much effect remains to be seen
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-21-2008, 04:16 PM
Brad Gile's Avatar
Brad Gile Brad Gile is offline
Member
CAS SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Studying for whatever I feel like
College: Alumnus of Brown and UW-Madison
Posts: 11,324
Default

I agree with Lucy and Will.
The three year experience requirement came about in 1979 as a relaxation of standards to extend AAA membership for all ASA and ACAS who could meet that requirement. That was how I became a member in 1979 as an ASA with ten years of actuarial experience. The quality of experience required was not defined and, as I recall, at least one AAA board member resigned in protest that this new standard was way too lax. IMO, it was (and still is) too lax.

Now they want to delete this completely? I not only think this is a bad idea, I think the relevant actuarial experience requirement should be strengthened.
I agree wholeheartedly with Will that this is especially critical for new ASA's who have met much lower actuarial knowledge requirements than their ACAS counterparts.
__________________
Brad Gile, FSA, MAAA
Affiliate Member of the CAS
Dedicated Retired Actuary

Spoiler:
Obama sucks and we all know it-TDA


Spoiler:

That's been the funniest subplot of this whole thing, the people on the left attacking this bill for not being even more of a steaming pile. - erosewater
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-21-2008, 04:21 PM
thing's Avatar
thing thing is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,395
Default

Pardon my youth and inexperience, but what was the requirement prior to 1979?
__________________
Visit thing's web empire:
Printable Sudoku Puzzles & 12 by 12 Sudoku & 6 by 6 Sudoku & Nurikabe
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-21-2008, 05:13 PM
Take 2's Avatar
Take 2 Take 2 is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: second estate
Favorite beer: Hires Root
Posts: 4,398
Lightbulb MAAA pre-'79 = Member, American Aristocracy of Actuaries

Quote:
Originally Posted by thing View Post
Pardon my youth and inexperience, but what was the requirement prior to 1979?
FSA/FCAS, letters of recommendation from 2 members. Considered more prestigious & valuable than FSA/FCAS. Allowing ASAs & ACASs was a big change, but EAs had already been grandfathered as members.
__________________
there is no situation so bad that
getting upset won't make it worse

Last edited by Take 2; 07-21-2008 at 05:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-21-2008, 09:59 PM
bdschobel's Avatar
bdschobel bdschobel is offline
Past SOA President
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sunrise, FL
Studying for FSA '76
College: MIT '74
Posts: 14,181
Default

This is a very good idea that I have advocated for years. Now that the 3-year experience requirement is included in the qualification standard, an identical requirement for admission is simply redundant. It can accomplish just one thing -- keeping younger (or just newer) actuaries out of the AAA. Why would we want to do that?

When I became an FSA in 1976, I did not meet the 3-year requirement and ended up postponing my application to join the AAA until 1986! Was that helpful to me or to the AAA? I think not.

We need to do all we can to get all U.S. actuaries into the AAA. Eliminating the now-redundant experience requirement is a step in the right direction.

Bruce
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-21-2008, 11:39 PM
Lucy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The requirement is not redundant, it guarantees that membership in the AAA means you have some experience. Requiring experience to sign this or that document is quite different, and much harder for our customers to understand. It is bad for the AAA, and more specifically, for qualified actuaries who are members of the AAA, to have unqualified members. If professional status is a "signal", meant to tell the market something (such as, "I'm probably qualified to do your job.") opening up membership to unqualified actuaries significantly weakens that signal.

Yes, just because you're qualified in one field doesn't mean you are qualified in another, and perhaps you aren't qualified in the field a potential client wants. And yes, you still have to have that "am I qualified for this piece of work" discussion, even with the 3 year requirement. But credentials ought to be simple, easy-to-understand signals. The 3 year requirement facilitates that.

How does it benefit anyone to get all US actuaries into the AAA? They are already bound by professional standards from their accrediting organization, are they not? Besides, I'm thinking that with this change the AAA becomes almost meaniningless, and there's no reason for FCASs or FSAs to bother maintaining membership. (unless they want to support the AAA's public policy role, which honestly, many US actuaries neither understand nor care about.) I would expect this to reduce membership over a few years, as the credential loses value.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-22-2008, 12:37 AM
American Psycho American Psycho is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 492
Default

So the next natural question is -- why is there an AAA?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aaa, count the votes, make you're vote count

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.26236 seconds with 7 queries