Description: As life span increases, there are many implications for actuaries and other professionals. The structure and content of Continuing Education (CE) must adapt to meet the needs of professionals with the strong probability of living to age 100, but also recognizing that for an increasing percentage of professionals, their productive work life will extend far beyond the current conventional retirement age. </p><p>This session will include content that is apropos for both more 'mature' actuaries who will face life decisions in the near future, as well as offer career guidance for younger actuaries preparing for longer work lives. It will conclude with suggesting that the SOA create a new, exclusive section specifically to address the needs and interests of older actuaries: We've Lived to 100 Actuaries. The SOA already has a program called Living to 100, which deals with the implications of a longer life span for the general public. Some of the new centenarians will be SOA members who will work far beyond the historical retirement age of the past. The purpose of this session will be to introduce the new 5-Stage lifetime work model so that actuaries can both individually and as a professional group, design CE for the realities of longer careers and life spans. In order to be professionally productive and happy as life expectancy grows, there are many changes that will have to take place in the continuing education of professionals--and actuaries are NO exception to this rule! </p><p>While this presentation will help 'mature' actuaries prepare for their longer careers and 100th birthdays, there are also serious implications and opportunities for younger actuaries that are best recognized and addressed long before reaching professional maturity in order to prepare for and enjoy a healthy and active actuarial career, as well as remain a productive and happier senior citizen.

Description: As the use of predictive models and novel datasets becomes more prevalent, a focus on consumer protection is being highlighted by regulators, ethicists, and industry insiders. Over time, increased rigor should and will be applied in model development and implementation. These issues are not new. Hundreds of individuals have worked on these issues in the laboratory, the board room, and the court room. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Uniform Guidelines of the US EEOC, the Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection and other sources are intended to protect the rights of citizens and consumers and provide guidance to professionals in the development and use of decision-making tools. Drawing heavily on examples and parallels from psychology and employment practices as well as other disciplines, concepts such as model bias, fairness, adverse impact, disparate treatment and the like will be presented. Suggestions to ensure model validity, demonstrate model and data relevancy and minimize the potential for adverse impact to protected classes will also be offered. Each of these considerations will be linked to recent dialogue and concerns in the Life Insurance sector.

Description: The days of reinsurance treaties bound by a handshake are long gone. Treaties have evolved into complex legal documents. The session will use a recently released study on recapture provisions as a starting point and will expand the discussion to other key treaty provisions. The focus will be on understanding the intentions, concerns and relative positions of both the direct company and the reinsurer so that a mutually beneficial compromise can be explored.

Description: Predictive analytics is impacting various actuarial disciplines. During this session, we will discuss how predictive analytics could impact and enhance retirement and pensions, along with how pension/retirement actuaries can utilize various enhanced analytical techniques. <em>This breakfast is open to all meeting attendees free of charge. If you plan to attend, you must register in advance.

Description: A pension plan uses Actuarial Equivalence to determine a 'fair' adjustment to pension benefits for form and timing of payment. The definition of Actuarial Equivalence is set in the Plan Document which may not have been reviewed for decades. With a wave of recent pension litigation in the U.S., plan sponsors, attorneys and actuaries now pay more attention to how pension plans define Actuarial Equivalence. How does a change in mortality table or interest rate affect the ultimate benefit? What are the requirements under ERISA and pertinent regulations? Are there court cases that have examined this question before? What are the issues behind the recent lawsuits and what can a plan sponsor do now to reduce their legal exposure? What alternative strategies are available for changing or not changing the definition in the plan document?