• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

European ruling - unisex pricing?

S

scarlets

Member
Europe may rule tomorrow that charging different prices to the two sexes for insurance and annuities is sex discrimination and they may impose unisex pricing requirements on insurance companies.

Won't this have a significant impact on the actuarial exam system? The tables would need a revamp for starters. Not forgetting everything in the notes which talk about sex as a factor. Seems a major change to me.

Also where will this end? Will they also ban age discrimination? Discrimination against smokers? I find it all rather ludicrous.
 
It is ridiculous tbh because statistics back what is going on, young men are on average less careful drivers than their female counterparts-


as for the notes and all that, I do not see any need for the CT notes at least to be adjusted because they are much more about understanding what exactly is going on rather than regulations and laws-getting the principles right, I am not too sure about the CAs, STs and SAs because I am not there yet and we also have to remember that even though the Institute is based in a country that is affected by EU rules, the notes span much wider than that, students in africa, india, australia where these EU rules won't apply....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Surely having unisex mortality rates will make things simpler... less rates to look up and all that.

Isn't there a wider question here of Europe's influence over insurance companies? With Solvency 2 and unisex pricing... it doesn't leave much room for innovation from actuaries with all these rules and regulations governing everything.
 
it does make things slightly easier but it doesn't seem like the difference between a pass and FA

I think in the way of innovation and creativity-developed countries are close to being fully saturated-it is in places such as asia and africa where i'd recommend anyone who wants to lead on innovation to go to. we all know that food demand is going to increase over the next couple of decades yet agricultural insurance is still quite scarce in sub-Saharan africa and regulations there do not seem as restrictive as those coming out of europe at the moment
 
Its Biology

Just saw this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12600284

I think the European Court of Justice will use common sense (something which they are not very famous for) and allow this form of sex discrimination in insurance to continue. Any ruling to the contrary essentially qualifies women to compete directly with men in sports. Disparaties in life expectancy (in favour of women) and accident rates (in favour of women) are as much a part of biology as women performing differently to men in sports
 
sonnyshook said:
I think the European Court of Justice will use common sense (something which they are not very famous for) and allow this form of sex discrimination in insurance to continue.
Click to expand...

I hope so but I doubt it, I would be very surprised. Political correctness / 'equality' agenda trumps common sense these days.
 
This is a sad day for the actuarial profession. Other risk factors which may constitute discrimination in the firing line for the future:

  • wealth
  • education
  • profession
  • lifestyle...(it doesn't mattter if you are a deep sea diver or not)
  • where you live
  • age in case of life insurance

People suggest more..its really amusing to think what else can be regarded as discrimination

I like this line: "According to the ECJ, Homo Sapiens is now unique in being the only species to boast three genders: Male, female and European."
 
Sadly I must declare "I told you so" .

On so many levels the EU is imposing things which are contrary to traditional common sense methods or values these days, hence why I was confident in my prediction.

Yes sonny, where will all this end - everyone paying the same for insurance regardless of their risk profile? What a backward step.

The idea of 'fairness' being promoted by Europe is utter nonsense and never seems to apply to a normal bloke in particular.
 
In my view this is a communist agenda being imposed on the people of Europe.
 
scarlets said:
In my view this is a communist agenda being imposed on the people of Europe.
Click to expand...

And you bet your bottom dollar the UK is never gonna get a Europe referendum - not at least until opposition to the EU wanes. Why do politicians ruin people's lives. And seriously what are they afraid of. I always thought the whole Europe thing had its limits but this.... LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE
 
Could this lead to the development of a new methodology for pricing/reserving? Maybe an approach based on GLMs? Or segregate occupations into say 6 separate levels ranging from least female dominated to most female dominated then constructing separate life tables, since this wouldn’t be direct discrimination against gender?. It would make mortality investigations a lot harder to carry out but surely something like this would provide benefit over a uniform life table for both genders.
 
sonnyshook said:
And you bet your bottom dollar the UK is never gonna get a Europe referendum
Click to expand...

The politicians will not rest until they've forced every human being in Europe to be * equal * euro persons.

* equal but not as equal as the politicians

EU referendums - yes we never get any of those (because they know what the answer would be - NO)

and even if we did they would just keep giving us referendums until we gave the EU the desired answer like they did with the Irish!
 
(1) Correlation != causation. Those trying to defend this are fighting a losing battle.
(2) It is for society (parliament + legal system) to decide what level of mutuality is appropriate, not actuaries/insurance industry.

I imagine that mortality/other risk differences observed between genders are in part down to gender, but how much?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DevonMatthews said:
Could this lead to the development of a new methodology for pricing/reserving? Maybe an approach based on GLMs? Or segregate occupations into say 6 separate levels ranging from least female dominated to most female dominated then constructing separate life tables, since this wouldn’t be direct discrimination against gender?. It would make mortality investigations a lot harder to carry out but surely something like this would provide benefit over a uniform life table for both genders.
Click to expand...

I't won't affect reserving. This is a pricing issue.
 
I have been reading the comments section of the dailymail online.. It does make you LAUGH how little people know and how they praise ignorance.. just look how they 'mark up' totally false and illogical comments. The funniest one I saw said

  • "More of my female friends have caused accidents than my male friends, and for once, this ruling is completely fair." Apparently owner of the comment has carried out his own studies on accident rates

OR

  • "Insurance should be based on risk not gender."


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oar-25-men-face-10-CUT-EU-rules.html#comments
 
gender and a rating factor

Its a funny one - i wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it in the newspapers myself (and checked it wasn't April 1st). A classic case of politicians meddling in things they don't understand and getting it wrong. I think its more an intelligence issue than a political issue, but maybe a bit of both.

For me it raises a few interesting questions about where this road is headed:

a) what is special about gender "descrimination"? Why is this protected, but not age, occupation, etc?

b) Why stop at motor? (Does this currently only apply to motor?) What about life insurance? And is it ok to give different annuity prices to men and women? If not, how about a 60year old vs an 80 year old? Where will it end?!

c) How much of problem is it for motor? We just need to refine the pricing models to use other rating factors, don't we? Ok, we're missing a good one in gender, but there are loads of other ones to make use of that may also be good proxies for driver ability/attitute/riskyness etc, aren't there? (But maybe not ones so objective and checkable.) Anyway, it will be interesting to see how the industry goes about solving this problem.

d) how does this impact sheila's wheels business plan?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mattt78 said:
a) what is special about gender "descrimination"? Why is this protected, but not age, occupation, etc?
Click to expand...

I think the logic (not that I am defending it) is that gender is not a choice whereas e.g. occupation is.

Following that argument I can't see how age will last long.

You can then move on to say that e.g. rating on postcode is descrimination against poor people who do not have the choice to live in other areas ...

b) Why stop at motor? (Does this currently only apply to motor?) What about life insurance? And is it ok to give different annuity prices to men and women? If not, how about a 60year old vs an 80 year old? Where will it end?!
Click to expand...
It covers all insurance. I would guess it will have a much bigger impact in life insurance than it's going to in motor.

c) How much of problem is it for motor? We just need to refine the pricing models to use other rating factors, don't we? Ok, we're missing a good one in gender, but there are loads of other ones to make use of that may also be good proxies for driver ability/attitute/riskyness etc, aren't there? (But maybe not ones so objective and checkable.) Anyway, it will be interesting to see how the industry goes about solving this problem.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly - it will be interesting to see what other factors come in place. I guess car make will have a much larger impact?

d) how does this impact sheila's wheels business plan?
Click to expand...
I guess they could hope to rely on their brand to continue to mainly attract women (I assume a man could always get insurance with them?)?
 
Interesting. Do men get the same amount of paterity leave as women get materity leave in Europe, and are treated "equal" in all other aspects?
 
All men should be able to have paternity leave just like women's maternity leave!!!

Men generally suffer a lot of abuse when their partners are pregnant! Surely at least some sort of stress leaves should be granted.

Also things like going for a check up with their partners should also be allowed, especially some women blamed men not helping them all the way through!!!

On the side......

I think age restriction of drinking should be removed as well! As it's not a choice for anyone not to be of age to drink....

I strongly believe that we are heading the communist society, so I can go to the judge's house and claimed that her house is my house, so is her car!!! So we all can have a party at her place!!!

Some people might argue that occupation is a choice...but if I were born that way, then it's not really my choice of not being a judge!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top