ACCA Leadership Damages Members' Employment Prospects

What is the value of ACCA qualifications? Anyone looking at the finance directorships of major UK companies will find that barely 1 or 2 of the top 200 positions are held by ACCA members. Many capable members are held back from earning a decent salary because of the negative policies pursued by the leadership.

Of course, the Association could address this by appointing ACCA members to top jobs within the Association. But that has not happened. In recent years, the number of ACCA directors has mushroomed to about 15. They earn over £100,000 each year with lavish travel, expenses and pensions. But most of them do not hold ACCA qualifications. Some have never sat ACCA exams but have been simply given ACCA qualifications and letters. Remember how previous ACCA chief executive Anthea Rose, without ACCA qualification, received salary of over £200,000 and has now retired on a pension of £124,000.

By not appointing ACCA members to top jobs, the leadership is effectively saying to the outside world that ACCA itself does not value its own qualifications. The qualifications are so bad that out of  a membership of 105,000 they can't find any ACCA member suitable for the top ACCA jobs. Whist the leadership shows contempt for ACCA qualifications, why should anyone else give a top job to any ACCA member? Is it any wonder that many ACCA members are stuck in comparatively poorly paid jobs. Over at the ICAEW, the chief executive has an ICAEW qualification and so do most of the directors.

At the 2005 AGM, AABA Director Prem Sikka asked the President and Chief Executive to explain the failures to appoint ACCA members to top jobs. As usual, the question was ignored.