Comments
mowotlarx OP t1_j5wlat2 wrote
Finish the story:
>Chu said he believes he is more qualified than Tyszkiewicz on paper. For example, there are different levels once becoming an actuary: The first level is an associate, which requires passing seven preliminary actuarial exams and then meeting a few other requirements.
>Chu is a fellow, which comes after passing three additional fellowship exams, he said. He is listed with the qualification by the Society of Actuaries, with a specialty in the public sector and pensions.
>Tyszkiewicz, though, is only at the lower apprentice level, according to the SOA
So the out of state candidate who got the job has spent 33 years at a lower level. He is in fact less qualified than Chu. The panelists never said Chu was less qualified - they said he was young (protected category) and he made some of them uncomfortable (because he talked about his husband). He could easily win this suit.
HEIMDVLLR t1_j5wosos wrote
I think you replied to the wrong person. I wasn’t defending the decision to pick the guy from Ohio but pointing out where he’s from.
MonsieurSandman t1_j5xigwv wrote
You are putting way too much weight on the associate vs fellow credential. I say that as a credentialed Fellow. A fellowship is a very impressive achievement and should be a consideration for hiring for top positions, but based on the press release linked in the article, Tyszkiewicz has been working for decades in important, relevant roles. That's worth a lot.
> Marek Tyszkiewicz has more than 33 years of actuarial experience, with a specialty in public-sector retirement benefits. Most recently, Tyszkiewicz served as President of Numeric Integrity Controls LLC, a firm dedicated to providing independent actuarial audits and quality control. In this role, Tyszkiewicz worked with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) redesigning, rewriting, and testing their actuarial tools. He also provided continuing education and training for CalPERS’ in-house actuaries. Tyszkiewicz also led technology practices that provided actuarial and pension administration solutions to public-sector retirement systems. Tyszkiewicz is an Associate of the Society of Actuaries and a Member of the American Academy of Actuaries.
The membership in the American Academy of Actuaries is part of what qualifies someone to issue statements of actuarial opinion. Associates are allowed to obtain it because they are qualified to do so with the requisite experience.
I don't know anything about either candidate beyond what's in the article (I don't work in the pensions sector either, for what it's worth). I expect it would be difficult to prove that Tyszkiewicz is objectively less qualified, but if Chu proves that his ethnicity or sexuality were considered by the board as he alleges he was told, he'd have a slam dunk case. Based on the only alleged reference to his age, concluding that his youth was a determining factor seems like a reach to me, but I'm not a lawyer and I understand why they'd tack it on.
SolitaryMarmot t1_j60opjv wrote
If one candidate came from corporate accounting, finance or insurance (I actually don't know where he came from but I'm assuming its corporate from the article) to the city 5 years ago and is a fellow and another guy has been working with CalPERS independent actuary for many years as an associate...NYC is gonna pick the CalPERS guy every time. Every one wants to point and laugh and yell 'they suck' at every decision CalPERS makes. Yet everyone wants to be CalPERS.
nycdataviz t1_j5xekho wrote
>he made some of them uncomfortable
Says who? Chu?
>Chu, who is gay, said he mentioned his husband throughout the interview, and he believes that made the board members “uncomfortable.”
What is this, a lawsuit against Santa Clause? He "believes" they had bias against him, the evidence of that -- his belief?
mowotlarx OP t1_j5y77xp wrote
Did you read the article? The evidence is panelists said that to his face.
nycdataviz t1_j5yhcw2 wrote
I read the article. And I read the above quote. Neither support what you're saying. Where is the quote indicating that?
Ok_Yogurtcloset8915 t1_j5zf6oi wrote
> One trustee allegedly told him, “I probably shouldn’t say this, the vote was very very close, but some people said that they were just more comfortable with Marek [Tyszkiewicz]. They should probably do some introspection as to why that is.”
> Chu, who is gay, said he mentioned his husband throughout the interview, and he believes that made the board members “uncomfortable.”
this is the quote in question, I think. not really as cut and dried as it's being presented. I wonder if the deliberations were recorded?
AsaKurai t1_j62d7mq wrote
You could reasonably assume that, but it would be hard to prove in court unless someone said it verbatim that him having a husband was uncomfortable for them
Ok_Yogurtcloset8915 t1_j63hajr wrote
yeah, that's what I was thinking. "more comfortable" is pretty ambiguous, and could be interpreted as referring to the years of work experience
Meowdl21 t1_j5wp6vx wrote
But why mention his husband? The abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz community is always whining
fotofilmatic t1_j5x8ciu wrote
Maybe because being married is sacred and it clearly means something to him. Enough to include it in his bio.
If he was talking about his wife it would be seen as adorably loving.
mowotlarx OP t1_j5y79zw wrote
They asked him about his hobbies and he said he travels with his husband. The way most married people would answer if asked. Read the article you comment on first.
Kind-Base6336 t1_j6m9vh7 wrote
Maybe read a little bit before chiming in. Straight people love to force their agenda with “trying for kids” and my “husband/wife” does that as if other sexualities don’t do the same thing.
elizabeth-cooper t1_j5wc4oa wrote
The previous Chief Actuary was from Ohio too. And this guy is from Connecticut. I don't feel any sympathy for him.
TekkDub t1_j5ykfu8 wrote
What? Craig grew up in Texas and went to Cal Tech before working in Boston. But he has been in NYC for at least 15 years.
Source: I know Craig
elizabeth-cooper t1_j5ylgtf wrote
According to his LinkedIn, his last job before here was in Connecticut. Either way, he joined city government in 2017 in a high position, was there nobody already in that office who could have been promoted instead of bringing him in from the outside?
TekkDub t1_j5yrqho wrote
You know it's possible to work for a company based in CT and live in NYC, right?
elizabeth-cooper t1_j5yswqy wrote
Did you read the rest of my comment?
Rottimer t1_j646czk wrote
Importantly, the previous chief actuary was Asian. You’re going to have a hard time proving this was Asian bias. Maybe they’re homophobic and you can argue that. But the other guy also has political experience in addition to actuarial experience with city pensions. I’m guessing this has nothing to do with his sexual orientation and more to do with having someone that gets politics.
bklyner123 t1_j5xaezz wrote
Are we going to have to pay for this shit?
nycdataviz t1_j5xe2yh wrote
Yes. Imagine your lifetime salary. Multiply that by 5.
That's the tax payout from your pocket for calling this guy young.
[deleted] t1_j5w8lvg wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j5wjgvc wrote
[removed]
banjonyc t1_j60u9j5 wrote
Sometimes you just don't get the job. It happens. Sometimes someone with less qualifications gets the job over you. This is life.
therealsylvos t1_j60wiz5 wrote
And sometimes you get discriminated against on the basis of being a protected class, and you sue your employer in court.
[deleted] t1_j6gaaoy wrote
[deleted]
Meowdl21 t1_j5w8m80 wrote
Chief hole
CaptainObvious t1_j5wlebg wrote
Hmmm, whom do I hire to handle billions of dollars, the guy with 5 years experience or the other guy with 33 years experience?
mowotlarx OP t1_j5wlkua wrote
He has 33 years experience at a low level of qualification without specialty in public sector pensions, which Chu has. Chu also works in the office in question, making him far more knowledgeable on how it's managed.
>Chu said he believes he is more qualified than Tyszkiewicz on paper. For example, there are different levels once becoming an actuary: The first level is an associate, which requires passing seven preliminary actuarial exams and then meeting a few other requirements.
>Chu is a fellow, which comes after passing three additional fellowship exams, he said. He is listed with the qualification by the Society of Actuaries, with a specialty in the public sector and pensions.
>Tyszkiewicz, though, is only at the lower apprentice level, according to the SOA.
therealsylvos t1_j5xh1s4 wrote
The distinction between associate vs fellow of the SOA is not particularly significant for pension actuaries, especially for someone with 3 decades of experience. You might differentiate between a fellow and associate at 5-10 years of experience, but at 30 it’s almost entirely irrelevant 99% of the time.
[deleted] t1_j5x73vo wrote
[deleted]
therealsylvos t1_j5xi6ja wrote
Who said Chu has 5 years experience?
socialistal t1_j5xxgtv wrote
I lost, it was stolen, I sue you, probably one of those kids who sucked at sports and got a trophy anyway 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
mowotlarx OP t1_j5y8h97 wrote
You know it probably would have been fine had multiple panelists on the hiring committee not told him to his face they thought he was young and talk of his husband made them uncomfortable. Those morons did this to themselves.
prisoner_007 t1_j5ymojo wrote
Not a single member of the panel did that though. At least according to the article you posted. Chu maybe right in his beliefs but based on the information in the article he makes a lot of assumptions to reach those beliefs.
HEIMDVLLR t1_j5wbkpp wrote
You can’t make this shit up…
> They said, ‘Craig should teach a class on interviewing,’” he recounted. But the job eventually went to the other candidate, Marek Tyszkiewicz, who has 33 years of actuarial experience and moved to the city for the job from Cincinnati, Ohio, according to his LinkedIn profile and the July press release announcing the hiring.
…Transplant from Ohio strikes again!