Wow, the questions sound angry. Most of the candidates sound calm. Some of them sound clueless, though.
1 Like
Thanks for pointing these out. The “We love the CAS group” (as part of a couple minorities, I signed up for updates in self-defense) encouraged its readership to send in questions, and clearly, either the leaders of the group did so, or possibly some of their readership as well.
I don’t intend to fully discuss this group, but I’ve personally never seen reverse discrimination in the workplace - some non-minority fellow employees were nursed along a little longer than they had the right to expect. (I was happy for them - I like people having second chances - but I’ve so far only seen this for non-minorities). I have seen people favored just because they were the same race/gender as their (typically nonminority) boss, or have a better relationship with (nonminority or minority) coworkers by being the same race/gender as those coworkers. And I’ve seen minority coworkers treat nonminority coworkers better by being more likely to trust their word, or less likely to be dismissive of their needs. And white males seem to win discrimination lawsuits occasionally. So I am not very sympathetic to this whole grievance about feeling discriminated against.
I am sympathetic to those who experience discrimination based on non-traditionally understood methods of discrimination, such as height, which I think underlies another of their grievances. It seems ridiculous to me how much people get for being taller than average. And of course low income is something that people struggle against and that makes sense too.
I think they fielded one of the candidates, too. I suck at remembering names, so I’m not going to post the wrong name right now, but there is one guy who seems to be running on a “block DEI” platform.
And Michael Larsen, who i think is running because he wants to get more modeling on the syllabus, also sounds like he’s actively opposed to DEI. The other six all sound, from their answers, like they recognize “it’s table stakes”, to quote one of them.
That’s the thing about privilege. Most of the privilege that comes up in real life is stuff that EVERYONE would have in a just world.
I’m not voting this year. I feel lied to by last years board candidates that said they were interested in DEI and wanting to move the society forward then taking a massive step backwards this year with a meeting in Florida.
I’m basically disengaging from all things CAS until they actually start to show up and do things to make things better instead of just talking about it.
1 Like
This is the opposite of my experience, so YMMV
Just read through the questions… about half the questions seemed DEI related…
Would have liked a question around pursuit of growing internationally
I think the work they are doing about recognizing systemic bias is useful. They are pushing that pretty hard, and it’s an area where actuaries are well-positioned to address and mitigate the problem. I also think they are doing okay work to diversify the profession.
That was one of the questions to the candidates (specifically, having a meeting in Florida) and several of the candidates gave, imo, thoughtful responses.
The two big “controversies” in CAS-land are DEI (with a whole organization, welovethecas, to oppose it) and the recent change to a more staff-driven model, which probably makes sense as the organization grows, but the implementation has been pretty disruptive (and not in a good way, more in a "let’s all stagnate and do nothing while we stress about it way) to the exam process.
Imma start an org called I’mambivalenttothecas.
With blackjack and hookers.who’s in?
2 Likes
Good for them. I don’t care until I see actual actions.
You ain’t wrong on that. Who in heck books a national org conference in Florida in today’s environment? Easiest thing they could do is move it (I get the admin would be horrible, but the decision should be a no brainer).
1 Like
Yeah, I have a good friend who lives in Florida who has invited me to visit. I’m sure I’d love his garden. But I’m not sure I even feel safe visiting Florida right now. Yeah, I’m cis, but maybe not cis enough?
Still, it’s hugely expensive to move an event that’s already been scheduled. The proof of the pudding, to me, is where the next several events end up.
I’m full on maga looking good old boy camo wearing pickup driving heterosexual. I’d likely get into conflict the first time I opened my mouth.
Not that I’m going to a cas conference in this lifetime.
That’s fair… personally I’d be keen for the CAS board (or prospective members) to come out explicitly that we’re not trying to imperialistically spread internationally (beyond USA/Canada). I’m all for helping the Chinese (etc.) P&C society(ies) to develop, etc. but it seems silly to me (in a very imperialistic way) that we should be trying to compete with a domestic Chinese P&C society for membership.
But, alas, if you spend loads of time working for the CAS I imagine growing internationally is exciting and part of what makes people want to do it.
Heck, I don’t see “growth” as part of the CAS mandate. I think its role ought to be to support casualty actuarial science worldwide, to support casualty actuaries, especially their members, and to credential casualty actuaries so that insurers, regulators, etc., can find appropriate talent.
But once you have people beholden to an organization (and that includes the board as well as the staff) they want to take care of the organization, and make it bigger, stronger, etc. I agree with you that we would do better to partner with China and India to improve their own societies, but I think the issue of “we must grow” is larger than just “internationally”.
1 Like
The last time the CAS had a big meeting in Florida, I took a little flack for giving the CAS the benefit of the doubt, expressing the opinion that it’s not very effective to pull an already-planned meeting from a state that has become repressive.
However, I am extremely supportive of the notion that we should not be scheduling big meetings in jurisdictions that are openly hostile towards some of our members. Unless CLRS locations are set in stone more than a couple of years in advance…there isn’t any excuse for choosing this year’s venue.
In the “meet the candidates” questionnaire, one of the candidates did make a reasonable point that the CAS has an interest in making CE opportunities locally available for members in afflicted areas. On that basis, I wouldn’t make noise about regional affiliates’ (e.g. CASE) choice of venues (unless they were choosing a site in a city that ws being particularly odious as compared to others in that state), and there are of course plenty of online CE options available.
But unless meeting locations are locked in further in advance than I suspect…none of the big CAS events should be in Florida (or a few other states) until things change.
I had not realized this year’s CLRS meeting is in FL. Yeah, no excuse for that.
Between the CAS and AAA, this is the fourth straight meeting that is focused on reserving that is in a state that was unsafe for me to travel to. The last two CLRS were in Missouri and Florida, the last two AAA Opinion Seminars were in Arizona (which is now better) and Georgia.
I’ve expressed my concerns about the choice of meeting locations in past CAS member surveys.
I wonder if I might need to up that to explicitly responding to CAS surveys with a statement like “I have no interest in engaging with the CAS beyond maintaining my credentials until the CAS commits to not holding major meetings and seminars in jurisdictions that are openly hostile to some of our members”.
That probably won’t do much, since my engagement levels with the CAS are pretty low (and I’m not an AAA member), since I only go to big meetings once every 4-5 years, and since I still need to maintain my credentials (i.e. pay dues, and webinars are my primary way of satisfying CE), but… 
2 Likes