# Optical Forums > General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum >  Are Opticians Losing Relevance?

## Wisconsin ABO

It appears that the majority of the public is unaware of what an optician is. Most view them as salesmen and some use them as a stepping-stone to enhance their resume for Optometry school. The field isn't what is used to be two decades ago. What are your thoughts?

I propose that we lower the educational standards in an effort to attract more candidates. This will bring back opticianry in the eyes of the public.

----------


## eryn

What educational standards do you speak of? Most states don't have any. I can't imagine it getting much lower than it already is. How would that better us to the public?

----------


## Barry Santini

The currently educational standards are woefully inadequate for what a value added optician needs to do today.

B

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

It cannot be expected that by increasing the educational standards that more candidates will be attracted to the field of opticianry. By making the field more selective, you are narrowing the already dwindling field. As it is, the general public is not even aware of what an optician does/is.

----------


## newguyaroundhere

You can not lower the education standards any lower than where they are currently. In states where no license is required to call yourself an optician (Such is Pennsylvania where I live & work) is this more apparent. I have personally seen people brought into this profession & given the title of optician only because of their looks & ability to sell with little to no optical knowledge. 

Until there is an agreed upon set of expectations of what an Optician is and should be able to do, we will continue to be fragmented as a group & lumped in with the Eyewear Consultants & Frame Stylists. The general public will never know the difference. 

I hope for change in my lifetime but it seems the Opticians in my neck of the woods are comfortably miserable with status quo with no desire to change things

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> You can not lower the education standards any lower than where they are currently. In states where no license is required to call yourself an optician (Such is Pennsylvania where I live & work) is this more apparent. I have personally seen people brought into this profession & given the title of optician only because of their looks & ability to sell with little to no optical knowledge. 
> 
> Until there is an agreed upon set of expectations of what an Optician is and should be able to do, we will continue to be fragmented as a group & lumped in with the Eyewear Consultants & Frame Stylists. The general public will never know the difference. 
> 
> I hope for change in my lifetime but it seems the Opticians in my neck of the woods are comfortably miserable with status quo with no desire to change things


The problem is licensure still exists in several states. In an effort to unify opticians and attract new candidates, we must lower licensure standards that exist in some states. Having a license makes no difference if the public does not know what you are or what you do. Also, lesser requirements will result in more job opportunities and hence the general public will have more knowledge of the field.

----------


## eryn

> It cannot be expected that by increasing the educational standards that more candidates will be attracted to the field of opticianry. By making the field more selective, you are narrowing the already dwindling field. As it is, the general public is not even aware of what an optician does/is.


If Opticians have actual knowledge of optics and skills to back it up than that's how the "value" of a profession can rise. Flooding the market with more uneducated "Opticians" will lower the value of our position and will make us seem more irrelevant than we already seem to a large portion of patients and consumers.

----------


## newguyaroundhere

So you want to lower the standards to increase job opportunities? What do you tell the people who have already obtain their licenses in their respective states? "Oh Sorry that you spent all those years in the apprenticeship program and exam fees but now your license value is diminished"  Now employers can say "Why should I pay you X amount of dollars when anybody can do what you do for Y amount of dollars?"

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> If Opticians have actual knowledge of optics and skills to back it up than that's how the "value" of a profession can rise. Flooding the market with more uneducated "Opticians" will lower the value of our position and will make us seem more irrelevant than we already seem to a large portion of patients and consumers.


The influx of new opticians through lesser requirements will lead to more social cohesiveness, and thus "value" will naturally arise to distinguish the fittest. Our number one priority should be to expand the field, and bring it back to the general public's eyes. As relevance returns to the field, the public can determine which optician is worthwhile and which is not. You can't propose that we increase constraints on a "dying" field to save it. We must focus on increasing our number.

----------


## Tallboy

I had to get some more business cards printed up because all the local competition who thrive with the "right to work" laws and lack of Maryland Optician standards keep funneling their mistakes my way to become my new clients!

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> I had to get some more business cards printed up because all the local competition who thrive with the "right to work" laws and lack of Maryland Optician standards keep funneling their mistakes my way to become my new clients!


You're generalizing. You're extrapolating your area's number of opticians and using that information to judge the optician population of the United States. Unfortunately, not every area of the United States is Somewhere, Maryland.

----------


## Tallboy

> You're generalizing. You're extrapolating your area's number of opticians and using that information to judge the optician population of the United States. Unfortunately, not every area of the United States is Somewhere, Maryland.


No I didn't extrapolate or generalize at all, I was telling of my personal experience in the eyecare industry of maryland. Lowering the standards even more so... is something that would likely bring me even more business.

Anyways, it is my personal opinion that your idea is a bad one, just my 2 cents.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> No I didn't extrapolate or generalize at all, I was telling of my personal experience in the eyecare industry of maryland. Lowering the standards even more so... is something that would likely bring me even more business.
> 
> Anyways, it is my personal opinion that your idea is a bad one, just my 2 cents.


I respect your opinion, and I wish your business success!

----------


## Tallboy

> I respect your opinion, and I wish your business success!


I have a feeling you should describe in more complete terms what your plan (no matter how informal it may be) would entail as far as a realigning of standards.  I would be willing to read your ideas in a more thoroughly explained manner.

----------


## Paul Smith LDO

> It appears that the majority of the public is unaware of what an optician is. Most view them as salesmen and some use them as a stepping-stone to enhance their resume for Optometry school. The field isn't what is used to be two decades ago. What are your thoughts?
> 
> I propose that we lower the educational standards in an effort to attract more candidates. This will bring back opticianry in the eyes of the public.


Thanks but no thanks.  Lowering standards that are non existing in most states makes no sense what so ever.  Removing them in states that required licensing has been happening for some time and you may get your wish.  I've seen the work of non educated and non licensed people in my state, their work only brings tears to the eyes of the public and mine. 

Personally, I'm getting tired of apologizing to the public for work done elsewhere and by incompetent maroons.  If you want to stand in a pool of mediocrity there are plenty of places out there for those who share in your idea of, "dumbing down" minimal credentialization.  While we're at let's see if we can do something about those pesky food handling permits, for people who work at restaurants.

----------


## optical24/7

> It appears that the majority of the public is unaware of what an optician is. Most view them as salesmen and some use them as a stepping-stone to enhance their resume for Optometry school. The field isn't what is used to be two decades ago. What are your thoughts?
> 
> I propose that we lower the educational standards in an effort to attract more candidates. This will bring back opticianry in the eyes of the public.





> The problem is licensure still exists in several states. In an effort to unify opticians and attract new candidates, we must lower licensure standards that exist in some states. Having a license makes no difference if the public does not know what you are or what you do. Also, lesser requirements will result in more job opportunities and hence the general public will have more knowledge of the field.


Wow, where do I start on how wrong all this is. 1st, most of the licensed states have provisions to allow anybody to work under a doctors license or a LDO. You don't have to be licensed to get a job. There are already entry level options. Getting rid of licensure wouldn't magically create new jobs in those states anymore than it already creates in unlicensed states.

There was a study done in NY state on public perception of Opticians. Over 80% think we have at minimum an associates degree (well over 50% think we had to have a bachelor's degree). The public already believe we had to have higher education to be helping them with their eyes. If your clients believe you're just a salesman you've done a poor job in displaying your ophthalmic knowledge and/or professionalism.

Many licensed states allow Opticians to fit CL's. Do we wish to lower the standard of care that anyone can fit a device that if done improperly could cause permanent eye damage? How about those of us that work with OMD's daily and have patients with low vision needs and need specialized lenses like Peli's for hemianopias?

Pay standards are already not great, it's difficult to make a living wage for many that call themselves an Optician. Why on earth would you propose we lower standards so that we get paid less? Yea...Bad idea to say the least.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> Thanks but no thanks.  Lowering standards that are non existing in most states makes no sense what so ever.  Removing them in states that required licensing has been happening for some time and you may get your wish.  I've seen the work of non educated and non licensed people in my state and there work, only brings tears to the eyes of the public.  
> 
> Personally, I'm getting tired of apologizing to the public for work done elsewhere and by incompetent maroons.  If you want to stand in a pool of mediocrity there are plenty of places out there for those who share in your idea of, "dumbing down" minimal credentialization.  While we're at let's see if we can do something about those pesky food handling permits, for people who work at restaurants.


Minimum credentialization is not guaranteed to attract "incompetent maroons". Opticianry, as it is, barely requires any form of education - obtaining an associate's degree simply requires a pulse. If we remove this constraint, more people will join opticianry, and the growing population will bring back relevance to this field. I'm more concerned about increasing the number of opticians in the United States than in trying to enforce stringent qualifications that make an irrelevant, and largely obsolete, field more competitive.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> Wow, where do I start on how wrong all this is. 1st, most of the licensed states have provisions to allow anybody to work under a doctors license or a LDO. You don't have to be licensed to get a job. There are already entry level options. Getting rid of licensure wouldn't magically create new jobs in those states anymore than it already creates in unlicensed states.
> 
> There was a study done in NY state on public perception of Opticians. Over 80% think we have at minimum an associates degree (well over 50% think we had to have a bachelor's degree). The public already believe we had to have higher education to be helping them with their eyes. If your clients believe you're just a salesman you've done a poor job in displaying your ophthalmic knowledge and/or professionalism.
> 
> Many licensed states allow Opticians to fit CL's. Do we wish to lower the standard of care that anyone can fit a device that if done improperly could cause permanent eye damage? How about those of us that work with OMD's daily and have patients with low vision needs and need specialized lenses like Peli's for hemianopias?
> 
> Pay standards are already not great, it's difficult to make a living wage for many that call themselves an Optician. Why on earth would you propose we lower standards so that we get paid less? Yea...Bad idea to say the least.


Apprenticeships and training can allow future candidates to become proper opticians. I'm not saying that we pick up random people off the streets, and make them sell eye wear. My main point is that it would be convenient to get rid of roadblocks in some states such as require certification, exams, and other formal educational requirements, as frankly, this field does not require that much knowledge - opticians are neither optometrists nor opthamologists. 

An optician should have knowledge of glasses, lens, measurements, and visual acuity disorders. This information can be delivered through a supervisor, it does not need to be on an exam-level. Market competitiveness will ensure who is the most qualified, and who brings the most value to the table.

----------


## newguyaroundhere

So explain how lower the standards and effectively, lowering the pay wages, is all of a sudden going to result in a boom of new opticians appearing out of the blue? How would this make the job as an optician any more attractive than scrubbing grease fryers at McDonalds or being a greeter at Wal-Mart?

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> So explain how lower the standards and effectively, lowering the pay wages, is all of a sudden going to result in a boom of new opticians appearing out of the blue? How would this make the job as an optician any more attractive than scrubbing grease fryers at McDonalds or being a greeter at Wal-Mart?


Would you rather scrub grease fryers at McDonalds or be a greeter at Wal-Mart, or would you prefer to have a job that no one's heard?

----------


## optical24/7

"You don't know what you don't know." That's the problem with Opticianry. If you don't have a formal education in optics and rely on your supervisor for your education you will not know more than he does. That's already the problem with our industry where apprenticeship is the norm. There's huge information gaps, Optican to Optician. Hence, the continued dumbing down of our profession.

And once again, how would lowering standards create more jobs? I've never, ever heard "Well, I'd open an optical if I could only find an Optician". More Opticians would not equate to more locations opening to hire these opticians. Heck, the market is already oversaturated. I've got over 20 competitors within a 5 mile radius.

----------


## newguyaroundhere

> Would you rather scrub grease fryers at McDonalds or be a greeter at Wal-Mart, or would you prefer to have a job that no one's heard?


Rather have a job that pays me a fair wage for my experience and skills.

You have yet explain how you think lowering standards is just going to have people proclaiming "Hey! You know what sounds like a good idea?? I think I want to be an optician today!" How this job and career choice would be any better than any other career choice just by strictly lowering expectations

----------


## rbaker

What follows is a personal observation and opinion and should not, in any way, be taken to disparage or demean any individual or organization. 
It is intended solely for the amusement of the reader.

Over the years, the job description of "optician" has changed rather dramatically. Historically, up until about fifty years ago, the craft of optician was pretty much self regulating i.e.. no government or corporate control. Each optician stood on his own two feet and was solely responsible for his business success or failure. Under this system only the competent survived. Apprentices were carefully selected and trained to the standards of the business owner and not some outside agency. It worked real good and the optician was a well respected and well recompensed member of the community.

There was no division of labor among the craft. A journeyman optician could repair and modify all types of frames and mountings and other appliances such as ptosis crutches and moisture chambers. He was also the "go-to" guy who fit and adapted contact lenses. He was familiar with and in most cases performed all surfacing, edging and finishing operations. Above all he had to be able to interpret an RX and make the appropriate lens and frame/mounting selection to meet the customers visual needs. The dispensing optician worked independently but had a strong relationship with the Ophthalmologist. All was well in the opticians vineyard.

But then, disaster struck. Actually it didn't strike but it was like when the camel sticks his nose into your tent. Little by little outside influences began to exert their influences, They were many and each can be the subject for later discussion, but briefly, outside influences began to make inroads into the business and many of the entrepreneurs in the craft left the field, seeing the hand writing on the wall. Corporate interests in the retail end of the business and the elimination of the independent wholesaler from the supply chain led to drastic changes in the manner in which the "old style" optician managed his business process. We also saw the introduction of "third party payers" and managed care. 

In order to ameliorate these changes the optician sought relief through outside means such as licensing regulations and formal education. Licensing was and is a failed effort to restrain trade and improve the quality of care and formal education was the delegation of learning to an outside source beyond the needs or requirements of the business owner. There were also many social changes afoot, such as the demise of the single wage earner households that contributed to the changing times.

So, in todays optical vineyard, we find dispensers, bench opticians, lab rats, order clerks, insurance clerks, stylists, sales clerks, and Indian chiefs. We find graduates of two year optical programs and high school drop-outs all performing the same jobs. 

The Craft of Opticianry is going to Hell in a handbasket. Abandon hope  all ye who enter!

----------


## wmcdonald

This OP makes sense in only one area. We do need to break down the walls that exist between some states. To do that means that we must have similar training and background across all jurisdictions, and we should include unlicensed states as well. But I wonder if he or she is merely a shill for a corporate entity that wants to eliminate requirements in those states with licensure? Some folks hide behind fake names and tell us little about themselves for a reason. Where the OP is wrong is in reducing already non-existent requirements on most states. The only way to do that is to open it up to those with high school diploma, and that will certainly not be beneficial. Research has indicated clearly that apprenticeship has been eliminated in every other health-related field except Opticianry because it was an inefficient delivery mechanism that did not achieve the level of training necessary. In another thread, he or she was arguing salary levels for Opticians with me, and quoted BLS, which is widely know as less-than-accurate data that does not take into consider a number of extraneous factors. They will not want specific links to said research, but I have little time to waste, so I encourage them to look it up if they wish.

----------


## wmcdonald

> What follows is a personal observation and opinion and should not, in any way, be taken to disparage or demean any individual or organization. 
> It is intended solely for the amusement of the reader.
> 
> Over the years, the job description of "optician" has changed rather dramatically. Historically, up until about fifty years ago, the craft of optician was pretty much self regulating i.e.. no government or corporate control. Each optician stood on his own two feet and was solely responsible for his business success or failure. Under this system only the competent survived. Apprentices were carefully selected and trained to the standards of the business owner and not some outside agency. It worked real good and the optician was a well respected and well recompensed member of the community.
> 
> There was no division of labor among the craft. A journeyman optician could repair and modify all types of frames and mountings and other appliances such as ptosis crutches and moisture chambers. He was also the "go-to" guy who fit and adapted contact lenses. He was familiar with and in most cases performed all surfacing, edging and finishing operations. Above all he had to be able to interpret an RX and make the appropriate lens and frame/mounting selection to meet the customers visual needs. The dispensing optician worked independently but had a strong relationship with the Ophthalmologist. All was well in the opticians vineyard.
> 
> But then, disaster struck. Actually it didn't strike but it was like when the camel sticks his nose into your tent. Little by little outside influences began to exert their influences, They were many and each can be the subject for later discussion, but briefly, outside influences began to make inroads into the business and many of the entrepreneurs in the craft left the field, seeing the hand writing on the wall. Corporate interests in the retail end of the business and the elimination of the independent wholesaler from the supply chain led to drastic changes in the manner in which the "old style" optician managed his business process. We also saw the introduction of "third party payers" and managed care. 
> 
> ...


Some see it as more than a craft, and this is not 1949. We can be more than someone who makes a pretty pair of glasses, and expand our horizons if we will.

----------


## Johns

> The problem is licensure still exists in several states. In an effort to unify opticians and attract new candidates, we must lower licensure standards that exist in some states. Having a license makes no difference if the public does not know what you are or what you do. Also, lesser requirements will result in more job opportunities and hence the general public will have more knowledge of the field.


I had to look twice to see if this wasn't a parody post.  I thought maybe "The Onion" had infiltrated Optiboard.

If this is in fact a real post, all I can say is that maybe the standards could be lowered enough that we wouldn't need to step up to them, we could just sluggishly roll over them.  The mindset of some people in the optical field is absolutely frightening...

----------


## eryn

One of the main ways to drive people to a particular field is not just interest in the field or lack of requirements to enter it. Most people also *gasp* want to be able to make a living. The way to increase salaries is to require education and to narrow the playing field not widen it. If there are even less requirements than there are currently then the title of "Optician" will mean less not more. We will spiral onto the list of "unskilled" workers and the wage will go even further down. You can't elevate yourself or your profession by dumbing it down. In this scenario you are only hurting yourself.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

Many of you believe that opticians can reclaim their former glory through educational reforms and universal licensure. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Opticianry has been degraded, faded, and has become largely obsolete - nothing but a faint memory. If we do not increase our numbers, we will be further ruled by the ODs. We do not want this to happen. By removing the licensure standards that exist in some states, we can become more free and unified. This new found cohesiveness can allow us to shape opticianry into a new direction. Folks, the good old days are long gone. We can either accept our fate as ODs' "technicians", or we can unite and separate ourselves.

----------


## rbaker

> Some see it as more than a craft, and this is not 1949. We can be more than someone who makes a pretty pair of glasses, and expand our horizons if we will.


I am attempting to bring some historical knowledge to the table. My family back ground goes way back to the founding days of American Optical (as did nearly everyone else who lived in Southern Worcester County) and I personally started working there in 1955. Up until I retired in 2002, with the exception of when I was off defending the country from the Red Menace, I had always had my finger in the eye care business in one form of optical monkey business or another.

To add some clarity to the discussion I wonder if you could give us a brief rundown on your involvement in the business. To state that all the "old timers" did was to make "a pretty pair of glasses" seems to indicate a lack of just what the optician did all those years ago

I realize that you do have a dog in the fight but I would hope that this will not cloud your critical thinking.

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> "You don't know what you don't know."


I know how to spell ophthalmologist, and that wasn't on the ABO exam! 




> I had to look twice to see if this wasn't a parody post.  I thought maybe "The Onion" had infiltrated Optiboard.
> 
> If this is in fact a real post, all I can say is that maybe the standards could be lowered enough that we wouldn't need to step up to them, we could just sluggishly roll over them.  The mindset of some people in the optical field is absolutely frightening...


I think the poor spelling OP is describing the Wisconsin Legislature's push for deregulating the trades, a political/business decision that's gaining favor in the majority of state legislatures across the country. If you need any electrical or plumbing work done on your home or at your business, now might be the time to pull the trigger.

----------


## CNG

Crazy comments...or a reality of life in unlicensed states. I entered this field many years ago never expecting a referral from an OD or an OMD. Almost 25 years now. Still making it. I just have one word about lowering an already low standard...idiotic. 
CNG

----------


## wmcdonald

> I am attempting to bring some historical knowledge to the table. My family back ground goes way back to the founding days of American Optical (as did nearly everyone else who lived in Southern Worcester County) and I personally started working there in 1955. Up until I retired in 2002, with the exception of when I was off defending the country from the Red Menace, I had always had my finger in the eye care business in one form of optical monkey business or another.
> 
> To add some clarity to the discussion I wonder if you could give us a brief rundown on your involvement in the business. To state that all the "old timers" did was to make "a pretty pair of glasses" seems to indicate a lack of just what the optician did all those years ago
> 
> I realize that you do have a dog in the fight but I would hope that this will not cloud your critical thinking.


You can see all of my credentials here on Optiboard under the speakers links. I am not saying all you old-timers, because I am one as well. I graduated from Opticianry School in 1973 at the age of 20. By the time I was 23, I opened my first independent optical shop. I owned a small group of successful optical offices for many years, and enjoyed my time there. I have been a contact lens practitioner, consultant and now in higher education. I have lectured extensively across the globe to eye care practitioners and continue today, some 43 years later. Know that I have tremendous respect and admiration for those, beginning in the late 1940s who sought to advance this field through education and through the development of educational programs to advance our sphere of knowledge. But I also have disdain for those who held us back, and they really worked hard to do so. We could have been so much more......just as Optometry and every other health-related profession has done but us. In your early days (1955), all glasses were just that, ergo the term "glasses." Then the world evolved with PPG and CR-39, and it has continued. Flat-tops, Round Segs and Execs were it. Now we have an extensive array of lens designs most have absolutely no clue about. Contact lenses have also been a part and parcel of the Opticians scope in the past, but we have largely given that up. We need to regain a foothold there. I could go on and on about new things we have available to us today. The technical side of optics has evolved with the rest of the world, while the only thing that did not evolve in this process was us. I think we can be more. We need to again be involved in CLs, low vision, management and refraction. We can do more, but it will take higher education. The way it is now, we are devolving into irrelevance. I am passionate about making it better before I am gone! Not only have I thought critically about this issue for many years, I have conducted extensive research in the area, and am one of only a few who have done so. Most do not consider Opticians worth their time......but it is where I started, and I love the field.....so I keep listening to this grief to try to make a positive difference. My research indicates the overwhelming majority of Opticians want to be working in a professional endeavor, not serving as order-takers. We can be more if we just reach out and try. I know it is late, but my respect for those who came before me......I hope, including you, Sir, demands that I not give up. Many think it is too late. Fine. In understand the frustration, but there is only 2 ways to go. We cannot go much further down, so I hope it is up. 

On a side note.......while I did not serve in the Corps, I am very close to the Marines. living outside Camp Lejeune, NC, a wonderful community, for 26 years. While there, many of our Marines, Sailors, and some Soldiers were killed in that terrible blast on October 23rd in Beirut. I am proud to be one of the founders, and initial chair of the committee that developed and built the Beirut Memorial. I recognize the commitment made by all of our service members, and I appreciate your service to our great nation. 

I appreciate the dialogue, and your perspective. It is only through such conversations that common ground can be achieved.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> Crazy comments...or a reality of life in unlicensed states. I entered this field many years ago never expecting a referral from an OD or an OMD. Almost 25 years now. Still making it. I just have one word about lowering an already low standard...idiotic. 
> CNG


Everyone has a right to their opinion, and I wish you success in more years to come!

----------


## tx11

Barry....value added optician ...?

----------


## chaoticneutral

> What follows is a personal observation and opinion and should not, in any way, be taken to disparage or demean any individual or organization. 
>  It is intended solely for the amusement of the reader.
> 
>  Over the years, the job description of "optician" has changed rather dramatically. Historically, up until about fifty years ago, the craft of optician was pretty much self regulating i.e.. no government or corporate control. Each optician stood on his own two feet and was solely responsible for his business success or failure. Under this system only the competent survived. Apprentices were carefully selected and trained to the standards of the business owner and not some outside agency. It worked real good and the optician was a well respected and well recompensed member of the community.
> 
>  There was no division of labor among the craft. A journeyman optician could repair and modify all types of frames and mountings and other appliances such as ptosis crutches and moisture chambers. He was also the "go-to" guy who fit and adapted contact lenses. He was familiar with and in most cases performed all surfacing, edging and finishing operations. Above all he had to be able to interpret an RX and make the appropriate lens and frame/mounting selection to meet the customers visual needs. The dispensing optician worked independently but had a strong relationship with the Ophthalmologist. All was well in the opticians vineyard.
> 
>  But then, disaster struck. Actually it didn't strike but it was like when the camel sticks his nose into your tent. Little by little outside influences began to exert their influences, They were many and each can be the subject for later discussion, but briefly, outside influences began to make inroads into the business and many of the entrepreneurs in the craft left the field, seeing the hand writing on the wall. Corporate interests in the retail end of the business and the elimination of the independent wholesaler from the supply chain led to drastic changes in the manner in which the "old style" optician managed his business process. We also saw the introduction of "third party payers" and managed care. 
> 
> ...


I love this post.  I read it in an deep baritone old timey voice in my head.  I had to use the dictionary and whats this?! A reference to Dante's Inferno?! I think this epitomizes everything I would have said if I reaeeeeeeely thought reeeeeeeealy hard.  +1 bud, first rounds on me

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> I love this post.  I read it in an deep baritone old timey voice in my head.  I had to use the dictionary and whats this?! A reference to Dante's Inferno?! I think this epitomizes everything I would have said if I reaeeeeeeely thought reeeeeeeealy hard.  +1 bud, first rounds on me


The post is amusing and informational, cheers

----------


## CNG

I think that knowledge brings success. I do not mind having less knowledgeable opticians be my competition. I think he is into something.

CNG

----------


## Barry Santini

> Barry....value added optician ...?


They dont teach any soft skills in school. Technical opticians who cant sell or relate to people are not worth their license today.

B

----------


## tx11

> They dont teach any soft skills in school. Technical opticians who cant sell or relate to people are not worth their license today.
> 
> B


I thought that might be what you were implying with that statement. It would seem that much of any technical skills requirement has already been  kicked to the curb in favor of being able to attract customers, upsell and close a deal.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

Knowledgeable or not, opticians will find what they need to succeed. If future opticians are passionate about their field, then they will find resources to educate and distuinguish themselves. Educational requirements does not guarantee that an optician will utilize their knowledge, it just means that they want their job. People on this website think that raising educational standards guarantees that opticians will bring value, prestige, and honor to the profession.

----------


## Paul Smith LDO

> Many of you believe that opticians can reclaim their former glory through educational reforms and universal licensure. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Opticianry has been degraded, faded, and has become largely obsolete - nothing but a faint memory. If we do not increase our numbers, we will be further ruled by the ODs. We do not want this to happen. By removing the licensure standards that exist in some states, we can become more free and unified. This new found cohesiveness can allow us to shape opticianry into a new direction. Folks, the good old days are long gone. We can either accept our fate as ODs' "technicians", or we can unite and separate ourselves.


I don't think anyone here is acknowledging that, ye olde opticianry is coming back, except you.  Apprenticeship went South with the pony express and the telegram.  Your thinking is archaic.  For those of us that live in licensed states we have fought hard to maintain our status and will continue to do so.  What you are proposing is exactly the big box stores have been forcing down the throats of legislature and the public.

Increasing the numbers of frame benders on the eyeglass sales force isn't going to accomplish anything except flood the market with more people who know not what the hell they are doing and why they are doing it wrong.  What you are asking for has been done and is already out there, swimming in a bowl of soggy off brand corn flakes.

----------


## Paul Smith LDO

> They dont teach any soft skills in school. Technical opticians who cant sell or relate to people are not worth their license today.
> 
> B


We had a full functioning optical where we all had to work.  We also had sales classes.  The truth of the matter is whether you have a law degree or a business degree there are classes, techniques, and procedures that the firm or company that hires you will be providing you with.

----------


## Barry Santini

> We had a full functioning optical where we all had to work.  We also had sales classes.  The truth of the matter is whether you have a law degree or a business degree there are classes, techniques, and procedures that the firm or company that hires you will be providing you with.


Interesting. This is exactly what the big optical companies say today when presented with the idea of offering ABO accredited courses or continued support the idea of licensure. They say they can teach what their staffers need to know by courses created and administered in house.

B

----------


## tx11

IT WOULD BE NICE IF technical skills were standardized, tested and a prerequisite to sell Rx eyewear.

----------


## Paul Smith LDO

> Interesting. This is exactly what the big optical companies say today when presented with the idea of offering ABO accredited courses or continued support the idea of licensure. They say they can teach what their staffers need to know by courses created and administered in house.
> 
> B


Until you work for someone else and they have their own idea as to how things should be done.  On that very note, I had to cut my optical incisor at  big box store and on Mondays we sold AR, Wednesday photochromatics, and on the weekend we pushed second pair suns.  Now I try to sell all three 5 days a week and no one gets upset if I don't push poly.

----------


## Paul Smith LDO

> Perhaps technical skills should be standardized and a prerequisite to sales skills


Absolutely, the perfect storm would be the melding of both theory and practical application.

----------


## Craig

> Many of you believe that opticians can reclaim their former glory through educational reforms and universal licensure. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Opticianry has been degraded, faded, and has become largely obsolete - nothing but a faint memory. If we do not increase our numbers, we will be further ruled by the ODs. We do not want this to happen. By removing the licensure standards that exist in some states, we can become more free and unified. This new found cohesiveness can allow us to shape opticianry into a new direction. Folks, the good old days are long gone. We can either accept our fate as ODs' "technicians", or we can unite and separate ourselves.


I love folks who hide behind sudo names and make stupid comments to incite the crowd!  Who are you and why do you hide behind some bogus name while throwing flames at a profession that you have an interest in destroying?

Craig- real name used as always!

----------


## mervinek

> You can not lower the education standards any lower than where they are currently. In states where no license is required to call yourself an optician (Such is Pennsylvania where I live & work) is this more apparent. I have personally seen people brought into this profession & given the title of optician only because of their looks & ability to sell with little to no optical knowledge. 
> 
> Until there is an agreed upon set of expectations of what an Optician is and should be able to do, we will continue to be fragmented as a group & lumped in with the Eyewear Consultants & Frame Stylists. The general public will never know the difference. 
> 
> I hope for change in my lifetime but it seems the Opticians in my neck of the woods are comfortably miserable with status quo with no desire to change things


It's the same here in central PA.  I can't imagine standards lower that what they are, which is nothing.  Idiots are calling themselves opticians around here.  How is that helping our field?  It's not. I believe in more standards.  Lowering them is a bad idea...just my opinion.  Oh and Craig... I use a real name too.

----------


## tx11

Joe Eyewear Customer doesn't care who sells him his glasses as long as they are affordable, look good and oh yeah that he can actually see well through them. The problem facing our "profession" is how to bring it back to its origins of being something THAT IS MORE THAN retail sales. One way to effectively do that is to have more and more of those BASIC ABO certificates showing up on OD, OMD and Chain dispensary walls. A strong, consistent pressure by dispensing peers to achieve this basic credential and display it would in effect reinvent the "optician" title.

----------


## Caroline

> words


Do you work for Essilor/Lenscrafters or something?

Why are we feeding this obvious troll?

----------


## newguyaroundhere

[QUOTE=Caroline;520968 Why are we feeding this obvious troll?[/QUOTE]



Because we are gluttons for stupidity and insanity?

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

Folks, take a look at this article 

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-molly-wharton

----------


## tx11

Barry IF YOU would write a Zig Ziggler type of book specifically for opticianry pertaining to the merging of optical knowledge with the soft skills you speak of and how to train oneself in them...I bet good money it would sell. :Biggrin:

----------


## Uncle Fester

Ok. I'll throw a grenade into the thread like I have in the past and make a wish.

I wish we would all advocate for all Wal-Mart workers (including optical) to unionize. 

Now implement an apprenticeship, journeyman and master optician program with education standards the same at each level in every state.

Organize other chains.

Try to assuage the MD's, OD's and independents who think this will squeeze their bottom line. My guess is they're already paying at appropriate levels for their optician's skill level and nothing forces them to be a union shop.

Licensed states can expect to see this relentless push by chains to do away with licensing to continue. CEO's cannot justify quarterly profits that drop from 5.25% to 5%.

This is my wish to make America great again like the way we lived in the good old days. If you're over 40 you remember- before unions were broken and our current political/corporate oligarchy was re-created.

Now where's my flak jacket???  :Eek:

----------


## optical24/7

> Folks, take a look at this article 
> 
> http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-molly-wharton


FYI, they already eliminated out Voluntary Registration in our state last August, it was never mandatory. ( The tea partiers here even wanted to get rid of our dental board.. :Rolleyes: ) Many of us worked hard to even achieve that several decades ago. But when they ended it, there were barely over 40 of us registered ( apathy runs wild throughout our profession.)

To get back to one of your earlier comments, which you still have not answered; How would de-regulation in licensed states increase the amount of Optician's jobs? It sure hasn't in states without licensure. Locations are not going to magically appear to hire them!

----------


## newguyaroundhere

> Folks, take a look at this article 
> 
> http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-molly-wharton


As Optical24/7 pointed out, it wasn't mandatory to have a license in Texas before they did this

http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...ighlight=texas

----------


## newguyaroundhere

> FYI, they already eliminated out Voluntary Registration in our state last August, it was never mandatory. ( The tea partiers here even wanted to get rid of our dental board..) Many of us worked hard to even achieve that several decades ago. But when they ended it, there were barely over 40 of us registered ( apathy runs wild throughout our profession.)
> 
> To get back to one of your earlier comments, which you still have not answered; How would de-regulation in licensed states increase the amount of Optician's jobs? It sure hasn't in states without licensure. Locations are not going to magically appear to hire them!


You know we will never get an answer on this from him/her.

----------


## rbaker

> Ok. I'll throw a grenade into the thread like I have in the past and make a wish.
> 
> I wish we would all advocate for all Wal-Mart workers (including optical) to unionize. 
> 
> Now implement an apprenticeship, journeyman and master optician program with education standards the same at each level in every state.
> 
> Organize other chains.
> 
> Try to assuage the MD's, OD's and independents who think this will squeeze their bottom line. My guess is they're already paying at appropriate levels for their optician's skill level and nothing forces them to be a union shop.
> ...


No flack here.

A really strong labor union, complete with goons wearing black shirts, white ties and pinkie rings could certainly straighten out this whole freaking mess. It would not be unreasonable to demand a starting wage of $55,000.00 per annum for a 30 hour work week, 120 days a year, with double time for overtime and weekends along with a better benefit package than a US Senator and a meaningful pension providing a living wage would be available after 30 years of service, say in the neighborhood of $65,000.00 a year. You don't agree to the union contract we shut you down, one way or the other until you do sign on the dotted line. 

The union would provide its own training and certification standards and you can bet your boots that they would be quite high as union contracts are based on the skill level of the union journeyman. The greater the skill level the higher the wage and the higher the union dues. Additionally the union would  have the financial and organization assets to deal with the politicians and regulators.

Does all this sound unreasonable? I think not. It is what the public school teachers in my local school district get.

----------


## Johns

> No flack here.
> 
> A really strong labor union, complete with goons wearing black shirts, white ties and pinkie rings could certainly straighten out this whole freaking mess.


You bet!  That would solve all the problems, so long as the promise to break the  knees of anyone who dares to shop the internet to avoid the higher prices.

----------


## Uncle Fester

> You bet!  That would solve all the problems, so long as the promise to break the  knees of anyone who dares to shop the internet to avoid the higher prices.


But Johns your prices wouldn't change and you would stand to gain more business!!!

----------


## Paul Smith LDO

> But Johns your prices wouldn't change and you would stand to gain more business!!!


Of coarse his prices would change, all of ours would.  If I learned anything from watching The Godfather and The Sopranos, protection comes at a price.

----------


## tx11

> But Johns your prices wouldn't change and you would stand to gain more business!!!


Come on UNCLE FESTER everyone knows that in todays economy price is at least 5th or 6th down on the list of why people purchase at one place over another (sarcasm) :Bomb:

----------


## Uncle Fester

> cians and regulators.
> 
> Does all this sound unreasonable? I think not. It is what the public school teachers in my local school district get.


Glad we agree on a living wage for a college education. 

Just maybe some of that extra money will trickle down to the brick and mortar optical.

----------


## rbaker

> You bet!  That would solve all the problems, so long as the promise to break the  knees of anyone who dares to shop the internet to avoid the higher prices.


No problem with internet sales. You don't have to bruise your knuckles or tear up your rotator duff swinging a Louisville Slugger at the head of a scab.The Brotherhood of Postal Workers and Letter Carriers along with the Teamsters Union would support the Opticians Union. 

United we stand - separate we fail. Understand! When our teachers strike the school bus drivers strike along with the drivers who bring the welfare food to the schools.

----------


## ex-optician

> Ok. I'll throw a grenade into the thread like I have in the past and make a wish.
> 
> I wish we would all advocate for all Wal-Mart workers (including optical) to unionize. 
> 
> Now implement an apprenticeship, journeyman and master optician program with education standards the same at each level in every state.
> 
> Organize other chains.
> 
> Try to assuage the MD's, OD's and independents who think this will squeeze their bottom line. My guess is they're already paying at appropriate levels for their optician's skill level and nothing forces them to be a union shop.
> ...


I posted a similar suggestion a few years ago and the response was far less receptive. I believe the title was "State of our profession" Today I see a more incouraging response. Perhaps things have changed and there is a sign of hope.

----------


## Uncle Fester

> I posted a similar suggestion a few years ago and the response was far less receptive.


It still is. Give it time.

----------


## tx11

Could someone (way more eloquent than I) convince EYECARE BUSINESS or 20/20 MAGAZINE to run a feature on the importance of ABO certification?

----------


## rbaker

> Could someone (way more eloquent than I) convince EYECARE BUSINESS or 20/20 MAGAZINE to run a feature on the importance of ABO certification?


There are occasional articles of this nature, have been for years, but apparently no one reads them or gives a hoot for the subject. I think that they are used primarily as fillers in place of Lorus Ipsum. Remember, the purpose of "trade journals" is to feather the nests of their advertisers, you know, the folks who pay big bucks to sell their products not some "outside issue."

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> Could someone (way more eloquent than I) convince EYECARE BUSINESS or 20/20 MAGAZINE to run a feature on the importance of ABO certification?


Unfortunately, a majority of people do not have interest in opticianry. The people in this field are merely seen as "eye glass salesmen". So, it wouldn't make sense to publish an article highlighting the importance of proper certification. 

Let's face it, folks. Opticians do not bring in a significant revenue in the eye care industry - that's where ODs and ophthalmologists shine. ODs have prevented us from refracting, so they can keep their money, and have a tight control over us.

This is why we need to lower educational standards to attract more opticians in the field. Only when we have numbers can we fight the ODs.

----------


## newguyaroundhere

> Unfortunately, a majority of people do not have interest in opticianry. The people in this field are merely seen as "eye glass salesmen". So, it wouldn't make sense to publish an article highlighting the importance of proper certification. 
> 
> Let's face it, folks. Opticians do not bring in a significant revenue in the eye care industry - that's where ODs and ophthalmologists shine. ODs have prevented us from refracting, so they can keep their money, and have a tight control over us.
> 
> This is why we need to lower educational standards to attract more opticians in the field. Only when we have numbers can we fight the ODs.


You keep saying lower standards is going to attract more to the field yet you have failed to explain WHY or HOW....you are starting to sound like a broken record. Hell, maybe become a politician since you have seemed to master the art of dodging questions thrown at you

----------


## rbaker

> Unfortunately, a majority of people do not have interest in opticianry. The people in this field are merely seen as "eye glass salesmen". So, it wouldn't make sense to publish an article highlighting the importance of proper certification. 
> 
> Let's face it, folks. Opticians do not bring in a significant revenue in the eye care industry - that's where ODs and ophthalmologists shine. ODs have prevented us from refracting, so they can keep their money, and have a tight control over us.
> 
> This is why we need to lower educational standards to attract more opticians in the field. Only when we have numbers can we fight the ODs.


I have been trying to follow your line of thinking but, so far, after a couple of ounces of the finest local weed, to total confusion. Correct me if I am wrong (and I am sure you will) you are proposing that we can somehow improve the craft, profession or whatever you want to call it by lowering the educational standards. You propose more idiots selling glasses. Cripes, we have enough as it is now. 

I hold , as you probably do also, that the optician is rapidly descending into Hell in a hand basket. Is it your contention that we should add a lower class of useful idiots to the basket. It is my contention that the skills and talents should be raised.

I am going to kick back and enjoy another doobie (I dearly recall some real nice Appleton, WI  Gold back in my younger days) and rethink my thoughts and see if I can find some hidden logic in your thought process.

----------


## smallworld

Appleton, WI is a nice city.

----------


## Johns

> I have been trying to follow your line of thinking but, so far, after a couple of ounces of the finest local weed, to total confusion.


Well, that statement clears up a lot of things for me.

----------


## Johns

> But Johns your prices wouldn't change and you would stand to gain more business!!!


Gain MORE business?  How is the fact that my workers are unionized going to increase my business??  My amish neighbors are constantly being driven to Youngstown and Akron, Ohio (still a lot of unions there) to build houses, garages, cabins, and remodels for union workers, AND many of the union bosses, who are too cheap to pay union workers, as they know they'll get a better price.  Yeah, that loyalty thing is really great, until it comes time to grab the wallet to pay the bill, and then you see the true colors.  Go to WalMart (I won't), and see the UAW workers lined up to buy their fishing gear and beer.  They are loyal...as long as they are being paid to carry the picket signs.

And, if they want to keep prices down (they can't) They will turn to more technology. What happened when McDonald's was forced to raise their prices?  Here you go...
http://www.neowin.net/news/mcdonalds...place-cashiers


As a business owner, when I used to look at a machine, or software, my first thought when approaching a $50k machine was, "Wow...way out of my budget!"  Today, I look  first as to how efficient is it compared to how we are doing things, and secondly, I look at $50k being one worker's wages, at $25 per hour, and no vacations, no FICA, , no unemployment,  no health care, no  coming in late, no calling off sick, no hassles.  And after the first year is over, it's basically free.

I'm in business to support my family, and the families of my employees.  Shoot me if I don't want to pay more than the market will bear.

----------


## optical24/7

> This is why we need to lower educational standards_ to attract more opticians in the field._ Only when we have numbers can we fight the ODs.


I've asked you twice (posts #21 and 55) "how". No answers yet, you know why? Cause you don't have one! I'm in the camp that you're just a corporate shill that would like to see licensure just go away....

----------


## obxeyeguy

> I've asked you twice (posts #21 and 55) "how". No answers yet, you know why? Cause you don't have one! I'm in the camp that you're just a corporate shill that would like to see licensure just go away....


I'm really enjoying this, as I'm at almost the end.  Who lowers their standards to "elevate " their profession?  Brilliant!  Do you work for the ABO?  Nothing changes even though a lot of us tried, even the "importance" of the ABO.  There  will always be the optician, and the mctitician!

----------


## mervinek

> who lowers their standards to "elevate " their profession?


+1 exactly!!!!!

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

My goal isn't to elevate opticanry to previous standards - it's too late for that. My goal is to simply bring it back to the public' eye. By reducing standards and restrictions, more people will have knowledge that this "profession" even exists. As of now, it's merely regarded as a trade, an unknown trade. People believe that opticians are the ones that either conduct eye examinations, sell eye glasses, or say "1 or 2". There is so much more to opticianry that that. Those that do know about opticanry, at least in my area, encourage others not to join this sinking ship. If we can get more to people join this trade, then more people will become aware of it. Competitive dynamics, value-based orientation, and survival of the fittest will dictate who will survive.

----------


## tx11

> My goal isn't to elevate opticanry to previous standards - it's too late for that. My goal is to simply bring it back to the public' eye. By reducing standards and restrictions, more people will have knowledge that this "profession" even exists. As of now, it's merely regarded as a trade, an unknown trade. People believe that opticians are the ones that either conduct eye examinations, sell eye glasses, or say "1 or 2". There is so much more to opticianry that that. Those that do know about opticanry, at least in my area, encourage others not to join this sinking ship. If we can get more to people join this trade, then more people will become aware of it. Competitive dynamics, value-based orientation, and survival of the fittest will dictate who will survive.


Wisconsin ABO its already that way in most states. Because there is no standard of optical knowledge required at all the "profession" has been reduced to the "fittest" (best) fashion minded salesperson.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

Most states, not all states. It's almost impossible to coordinate opticianry when different standards exist across states. There has to be uniformity to achieve action and results.

----------


## tx11

> Most states, not all states. It's almost impossible to coordinate opticianry when different standards exist across states. There has to be uniformity to achieve action and results.


The ABO EXAM is a national standardized test that is available to EVERYONE

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> The ABO EXAM is a national standardized test that is available to EVERYONE


An ABO certificate is equivalent to putting a pin on your jacket. The opticianry field is not at a level where this sort of "achievement" brings recognition, experience, and prestige to customers' eyes. Therefore, the value of this exam, yes I admit there is some, is not as renowned or better yet, known to the public.

----------


## optical24/7

> I've asked you twice (posts #21 and 55) "how". No answers yet, you know why? Cause you don't have one! I'm in the camp that you're just a corporate shill that would like to see licensure just go away....


........

----------


## newguyaroundhere

Still waiting for the explanation on how lowering expectations is just going to create this optician boom you so speak. Or will you just continue avoiding the question altogether repeating the same garbage over and over again

----------


## tx11

> An ABO certificate is equivalent to putting a pin on your jacket. The opticianry field is not at a level where this sort of "achievement" brings recognition, experience, and prestige to customers' eyes. Therefore, the value of this exam, yes I admit there is some, is not as renowned or better yet, known to the public.


 As the achievement of the ABO certificate is displayed on more and more dispensary walls the public will recognize it more readily AND subtle pressure will be placed on non-certified "sales people" to earn it. Raising the standard of the profession and the publics awareness of the knowledge needed to dispense well.

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> As the achievement of the ABO certificate is displayed on more and more dispensary walls the public will recognize it more readily AND subtle pressure will be placed on non-certified "sales people" to earn it. Raising the standard of the profession and the publics awareness of the knowledge needed to dispense well.


For a normal, well-off field this makes sense. With that being said, many people don't care about who fixes, adjusts, or maintains their eye wear. They care about people who perform eye examinations, say "1 or 2", etc. Yes, the ABO certificate can distinguish opticians, but the average folk don't place that much importance on an optician. The field is really at an all time low. We need to rise and expand.

----------


## newguyaroundhere

> For a normal, well-off field this makes sense. With that being said, many people don't care about who fixes, adjusts, or maintains their eye wear. They care about people who perform eye examinations, say "1 or 2", etc. Yes, the ABO certificate can distinguish opticians, but the average folk don't place that much importance on an optician. The field is really at an all time low. We need to rise and expand.


AND YET YOU WANT TO LOWER THE STANDARDS EVEN FURTHER!   My goodness is this nonsense painful. Congrats corporate lackey, you're the first person I get to actually use the ignore feature on

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> AND YET YOU WANT TO LOWER THE STANDARDS EVEN FURTHER!   My goodness is this nonsense painful. Congrats corporate lackey, you're the first person I get to actually use the ignore feature on


I don't think you understand the logic.

----------


## optical24/7

> I've asked you twice (posts #21 and 55) "how". No answers yet, you know why? Cause you don't have one! I'm in the camp that you're just a corporate shill that would like to see licensure just go away....


. ........

----------


## Wisconsin ABO

> . ........





> I don't think you understand the logic.


..

----------


## Jubilee

> Unfortunately, a majority of people do not have interest in opticianry. The people in this field are merely seen as "eye glass salesmen". So, it wouldn't make sense to publish an article highlighting the importance of proper certification. 
> 
> Let's face it, folks. Opticians do not bring in a significant revenue in the eye care industry - that's where ODs and ophthalmologists shine. ODs have prevented us from refracting, so they can keep their money, and have a tight control over us.
> 
> This is why we need to lower educational standards to attract more opticians in the field. Only when we have numbers can we fight the ODs.



I would like to beg to differ. In most optometric practices, it is the dispensary that brings in most of the revenue. In most places, the metric is above 60% of the revenue comes from optical sales. When put in that perspective, it the opticians are the ones who are making these ODs shine. 

Even better than garnering more numbers, what we really need to do is find a way to motivate them. As has been mentioned before, apathy runs deep in our profession. Most are not concerned about improving themselves because they believe they know it all already. Heck, I was there at one point going why do I need to pursue certification, when I already have all this education and experience behind me. Fortunately, all the time I spent around like the likes of Judy, Wes, Barry, and others shown me that I need to pursue this to keep my knowledge fresh and current, but most of all to show I give a damn about what I do for a living. 

Having a million more opticians who don't care about anything more than collecting a check won't solve our current crisis. It is by coming up with a unified standard and identity of what it means to be an optician that we'll find our saving grace.

----------


## rbaker

> Folks, take a look at this article 
> 
> http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-molly-wharton


Oh yah. Take a look at this.

Opticianry's  loss is the car salesman's gain.

The industry organization that represents used car dealers on Monday pitched lawmakers on a bill that they said would improve the used car buying experience for consumers and help combat the sometimes-dubious reputation of used car salesmen.

"You have to be licensed and educated to do real estate, you have to be licensed and educated to cut hair, and you have to keep up regular classes on a yearly basis to do these things," Melissa Otis, executive director of the Massachusetts Independent Automobile Dealers Association (MIADA) said. "But you do not have to be educated to sell a consumer the second largest purchase that they typically make in their lifetime."

MIADA testified in support of a bill (S 1903) that would require used auto dealers to attend an eight-hour training course and pass a standardized test before being issued a license by a city or town. The bill would also require licensed dealers to complete four hours of a continuing education course every two years.

"We feel that that is the minimum requirement to at least provide some information about what the used car industry is about and what the rules and regulations are all about," Jeff Haggerty, who represents MIADA, told the Joint Committee on Transportation. "Our goal as an association is to improve the professionalism and the knowledge of dealers so, ultimately, they do the right thing and the consumer benefits from it."

Haggerty estimated that there are between 4,000 and 5,000 licensed used car dealers in the state. A similar bill, he said, has been filed in the last three sessions of the Legislature and has been given favorable reports from the Transportation Committee each time.

----------


## Craig

> I don't think you understand the logic.


You might not be the best person to say anything about logical thinking!  Do you wake up and put on a troll costume to start the day?

I am against anyone who posts behind a fake name.  You are a ......

----------


## optical24/7

> I've asked you twice (posts #21 and 55) "how". No answers yet, you know why? Cause you don't have one! I'm in the camp that you're just a corporate shill that would like to see licensure just go away....


...

----------


## Steve Machol

Another one off the rails. Thread closed.

----------

