mowotlarx OP t1_j5wlat2 wrote
Reply to comment by HEIMDVLLR in I was passed over as NYC’s Chief Actuary because I’m Asian and gay, former deputy says in lawsuit | amNewYork by mowotlarx
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.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments