What's wrong with this profession

[BigMactuary,]

A few clarifications:

My outburst is a result of casual conversations with several new students who blatantly say that they dont see themselves working as an actuary but decided to take shelter from the economy. Lets take one of these people and one student who really wants to be an actuary. Both take and pass the first exam and apply for the same job. The non-serious gets the job. The serious guy is discouraged. the non-serious one leaves after 2 years. ta ta bye bye. WTF???????

When I say "we", I mean we as a profession. I dont mean employees or employers.

You cannot just wake up one day and decide, oh mama I want to be a doctor, lets take one exam and apply for a job. But you can wake up in the morning with a hangover from previous night and say ok lets take the first exam and become an actuary until my dad's fishing business takes off in a couple years. I just dont get this.

[oscar peterson]

Then why choose a profession that apparently requires such little training? If the standards for entry are such that anyone can join, why play with such an underachieving crowd? And if you are better trained than them, don't you win in all of this? Or, does it just seem like it doesn't matter how well you are trained?

I imagine that one can not pass actuarial exams hungover.

And, perhaps the student who flees to the fishing boat will bring actuarial expertise to the industry, creating a new role for actuaries. Aquaticary.

[Westley]

Originally Posted by BigMactuary,

My outburst is a result of casual conversations with several new students who blatantly say that they dont see themselves working as an actuary but decided to take shelter from the economy. Lets take one of these people and one student who really wants to be an actuary. Both take and pass the first exam and apply for the same job. The non-serious gets the job. The serious guy is discouraged. the non-serious one leaves after 2 years. ta ta bye bye. WTF???????

Some of those students will actually surprise themselves and find out that this is the right place for them. If not, no big deal. No sympathy for the serious guy - if he's got skills, he will find a job. If he doesn't, then too bad. The competition for entry-level positions is a good thing. Just because somebody is serious about wanting to be an actuary doesn't mean that this is the right career for them. If it's the right career, then they will get there.

[The Matrix]

Originally Posted by BigMactuary,

Lets take one of these people and one student who really wants to be an actuary. Both take and pass the first exam and apply for the same job.

Westley is right on the money. There are no entitlements. Anyway, I interview lots of people who say "I've known that I wanted to be an actuary since I was 15." If I look at his/her resume and ONLY see one exam in all the time from 15 until whenever s/he graduates from college, the interview is over.

If a person really wants to be an actuary, they'll differentiate themselves from the "casual actuary" both in exam progress and career success. You'll always be able to spot the professional in a sea of amateurs.

[Incredible Hulctuary]

Originally Posted by BigMactuary,

A few clarifications:

My outburst is a result of casual conversations with several new students who blatantly say that they dont see themselves working as an actuary but decided to take shelter from the economy. Lets take one of these people and one student who really wants to be an actuary. Both take and pass the first exam and apply for the same job. The non-serious gets the job. The serious guy is discouraged. the non-serious one leaves after 2 years. ta ta bye bye. WTF???????

If that serious guy was really serious, he'd have enough determination to find a job elsewhere.

[BigMactuary,]

Some of you suggested I look for a different profession. It woud take going back to college, whereas to get into this profession all it takes is one exam. You tell me you see nothing wrong with this!

[BigMactuary,]

In a consulting company all it takes is to have the first 2 exams to get in. After that you dont have to pass anymore exams. You can keep taking them for 6/7 years and keep failing and your bosses dont care (because your boss never passed beyond exam 3 either). However your boss does care if you do pass exams because now you are a credentialed actuary from SOA and he/she never got beyond course 3. So now you'd be in trouble for showing promise.

The ones who keep failing for 6/7 years, eventually decide to take EA exams. I have taken and passed EA exams and I have to say they are much easier than SOA exams. So there - you start signing forms and become and actuary.

glenn, I know that exams are a great equalizer and I like that about this profession. But it applies more to insurance industry. The consulting world has different rules. You take couple exams and thats it, literally. You tell me you see nothing wrong with this.

[oscar peterson]

Is this more/strictly true of pension consulting?

Some would be thankful for not having to take the exams, especially if they are less than perfectly relevant!

[VernSchil]

Not all firms let you sign with just an EA. I think most require both ASA and EA. It's the FSA in pension that's usually pretty worthless.

[bm1729]

If you are speaking from experience BigMac, then I cannot challenge what you are saying. But if I take the following statement at face value, then there is something wrong with it.

Originally Posted by BigMactuary,

In a consulting company all it takes is to have the first 2 exams to get in. After that you dont have to pass anymore exams. You can keep taking them for 6/7 years and keep failing and your bosses dont care (because your boss never passed beyond exam 3 either). However your boss does care if you do pass exams because now you are a credentialed actuary from SOA and he/she never got beyond course 3. So now you'd be in trouble for showing promise.

If your boss had what it takes to climb the corporate ladder and become a boss without having to obtain his credentials, then presumably he understands that credentials mean nothing by themselves. So why would he be concerned when one of his subordinates receives his credentials?