An unnecessary financial merry go-round

Further to my previous article, the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA) is now selling dinners at ￡500 a head to raise money for its IFoA Foundation, a charitable organisation designed to give financial help to students who might not otherwise be able to afford to pay its membership, tuition and exam fees.

Instead, why doesn't the IFoA simply reduce its prices to near break even levels?

As I've previously suggested, rather than getting Peter to pay Paul, since the IFoA seems to make a significant surplus from exams (and I suspect tuition material too, a lot of which the IFoA seems to have copyrighted without paying any kind of royalties to actuaries who wrote the material), why doesn't the IFoA simply reduce its prices to near break even levels? That way more students will be able to afford to become actuaries without the frictional cost of A paying B (the IFoA Foundation) to pay student C's fees.

And an ethical merry go-round too

While dinners for IFoA Foundation looks like Alice in Wonderland economics, the following looks like Alice in Wonderland ethics:

Make it make sense: the IFoA trumpets support for DEI and ending modern slavery, but holds a conference in Saudi Arabia (one of the highest places in the world for modern slavery)

The IFoA has just boasted about how (presumably its) actuaries can help to stop modern slavery, while at the same time:

• boasting about having held a successful conference last year in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and planning to hold another one there.
• punishing members who criticise religious texts that support slavery (including sexual, and including young girls).

As actuary Steve Mills pointed out in the comments (before the IFoA blocked any further comments), Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of modern slavery in the world (it is the 4th highest globally).

It also held a record number of executions last year in Deera Square (known infamously as ChopChop Square), a mere 15 minutes drive from where the IFoA held its conference.

The IFoA constantly pushes "DEI" (Diversity Equity and Inclusion) to its members. Its Regulatory Board is particularly keen on doing this (while being far less keen to investigate actual financial scandals, such as the loyalty penalty suffered by many older policyholders for years, and the financial losses suffered by pension plans who had probably unwittingly bet heavily against a rise in interest rates in autumn 2022). With some exceptions, members have been far less enthusiastic about "DEI" (something that played a significant part in the massive grooming gangs scandal in the UK). Perhaps that explains why the Regulatory Board has delayed publishing its minutes yet again, so that the most recent minutes are from 4 meetings ago. Its annual report has also been delayed.

How is trumpeting a conference in Saudi Arabia consistent with pushing DEI, when, apart from the hypocrisy over modern slavery, people can be executed in Riyadh for being gay, or for "blasphemy"?

Is the IFoA going to offer its non heterosexual members a discount for risk if they attend the conference? How "diverse" is the conference going to be?

IFoA actuaries deserve better. All actuaries deserve better

By acting in this way, is the IFoA really enhancing the reputation of its members? How do actuaries from other bodies feel about such blatant "Do as I say, not as I do" behaviour?

IFoA qualified actuaries (and those from several other bodies too): if you want a professional organisation that is far better value for money and avoids overregulation (with its attendant risk of hypocrisy as shown by the IFoA's actions as opposed to its words), take a look at the International Qualified Actuaries Group.

#actuaries #valueformoney #overregulation #ifoa