Refund of exemption fees following change in syllabus.

82% of women leave the profession after 7 years... indirect sex discrimination for sure

 

I'm sorry but what's this got to do with sex discrimination? Maybe I'm missing something

 

There must be some discriminatory policy resulting in women having to quit after 7 years

 

I think doubling up exams makes the profession even more inaccessible to women.

 

Could you please link the source for this figure? Whats the equivalent statistic for men?

 

They may have decided not to pursuit the exams any more
They may have moved jobs and new employer will not pay for them to be a member if not sitting exams any more.
They may have moved jobs away from the actuarial field
They may be leaving for family reason,
They may be leaving because they believe there is no need to be a member of the institute to do their role
Their employer may have decided that the employees do not need to be members of their institute do the jobs and want to save money.

They may be leaving for any number of different reasons.
I don't live in the UK, but for instance where I do live, a large number of qualified people have left the institute due to new tax rules, that has led to employees having to pay the BIK tax, - they refuse to pay it, and have no requirement to be a member of the institute and so let their membership lapse.

For all the reason's I've listed above - how many of them are in your 82% figure - because if your throwing stats around - you need to have the back up available.

 

Your making a very sexiest remark with that comment - are you saying that men and women are not equal?

 

Not at all. I guess you're the latest erm, on here, what's that word again?

 

Clearly none of those reasons could possibly apply to men...

 

They could be but the poster made no remark about the number of men leaving the profession- why was this? why attack women?

For some reason yourself and the other poster have decided to mark remarks and attack women in the profession despite it having nothing to do with this thread -

 

There's no one attacking women whatsoever. We're standing up for them.

 

Agreed. This post has taken a very unnecessary sexist turn when both genders are equally impacted by the changes. There was no need to bring sex into the discussion at all, either to disadvantage or support

 

Then why having the changes made the profession more inaccessible to women and not men?

It's a sexist comment to say it and then you don't even explain your reasons for saying it