You’ve probably seen “tombstones” that occasionally appear in an actuarial organization’s newsletter. These notices publish the name of an actuary who has been found by that organization’s Discipline Committee to have materially violated the Code of Professional Conduct, and usually also materially violated an Actuarial Standard of Practice as well. There may be a short description of the actuary’s actions that comprise the violation. The public discipline is a public reprimand, a suspension or an expulsion from the organization.

There is another form of discipline, private reprimand. All discipline remains on the record of the subject actuary.

Although each applicable actuarial organization selects and administers its own discipline, if any, each relies heavily on the findings and recommendations of the ABCD. If the case is not dismissed earlier in the process, the ABCD holds a hearing and deliberates. If it finds material violations, it decides what discipline to recommend. Thereafter, the ABCD provides a findings and recommendation letter along with the hearing transcript to each applicable organization.

This session will emulate the deliberation process used by the ABCD after the Subject Actuary and the investigator have finished testifying and have left the hearing. In this session, the speakers will role-play as ABCD members and:

• Identify the facts of the mock case as they understand them
• Record a time-line of the case
• Determine whether specific Precepts or ASOPs have been violated
• Discuss any mitigating or exacerbating facts or circumstances
• Determine whether violations are material
• Discuss what level of discipline, if any is appropriate, should be recommended to the Subject Actuary’s membership organization(s)

The case presented is entirely fictitious, and is not based on any prior cases referred to the ABCD. The mock deliberations during this session will be greatly condensed f

Speakers