# Optical Forums > Ophthalmic Optics >  Opticianry and Optometry

## MarySue

May I ask why an optometrist needs to understand lens design? Do you work with opticians? Have you made the wrong career choice?

I suspect if I wanted to learn ophthalmoscopy from an optometry forum you'd have issues? Sorry if it sounds jaded, it isn't meant to. I'm trying to understand how a clinician, trained in diagnosis of eye health disease has the desire to work with spectacle lenses. 

I do believe the Canadians have it right - optometry is about medical care, whereas opticianry is about dispensing prescriptions. Go Canucks!

What do you think?

 :Nerd:

----------


## Barry Santini

> May I ask why an optometrist needs to understand lens design? Do you work with opticians? Have you made the wrong career choice?
> 
> I suspect if I wanted to learn ophthalmoscopy from an optometry forum you'd have issues? Sorry if it sounds jaded, it isn't meant to. I'm trying to understand how a clinician, trained in diagnosis of eye health disease has the desire to work with spectacle lenses. 
> 
> I do believe the Canadians have it right - optometry is about medical care, whereas opticianry is about dispensing prescriptions. Go Canucks!
> 
> What do you think?


I imagine that the practice of optometry, in a wholistic fashion, demands a working knowledge of ophthalmic optics, eyewear fabrication and ophthalmic dispensing.

my 2 cents.

Barry

PS - Mary, I find your posts *always* informative and illuminating

----------


## Darryl Meister

> I'm trying to understand how a clinician, trained in diagnosis of eye health disease has the desire to work with spectacle lenses.


Keep in mind that _writing_ a spectacle prescription requires at least a basic undestanding of ophthalmic optics. In a perfect world, where every optician has been trained extensively in ophthalmic optics, lenses, and dispensing, independent optometry might be less reluctant to completely entrust opticians with their patients after the exam.

But, as it stands at the now, optometrists in the US  undergo considerably more training in ophthalmic optics and dispensing than the majority of practicing opticians due to lack of education standards and requirements. Besides, clinicians in most branches of healthcare are generally "taught the basics," whether or not these are later entrusted to a nurse or technician.

Remember that OptiBoard is a forum for eyecare professionals of all ilk, not just opticians.

----------


## MarySue

> I imagine that the practice of optometry, in a wholistic fashion, demands a working knowledge of ophthalmic optics, eyewear fabrication and ophthalmic dispensing.
> 
> my 2 cents.
> 
> Barry
> 
> PS - Mary, I find your posts *always* informative and illuminating


Thanks Barry - I hope I've hidden my frustration at the lack of cooperation between professions (optometry and opticianry). Unfortunately, I've had first hand experience of optometry wanting to utilise the training and experience of a qualified d.o., but not wanting to support their advancement in any field.  It feels a bit ... "servant know thy place" at times.

My own training allows contact lens fitting and refraction training -which I believe makes me a better dispenser.  I have never seen an optometrist lose his or her job because of my additional training. 

My real question I guess - is when will we opticians standardise our training world wide?

:)  Cheeky eh?  Your posts are great - btw - hardly ever comment because you leave nothing unsaid.  :cheers:

----------


## MarySue

> Remember that OptiBoard is a forum for eyecare professionals of all ilk, not just opticians.


I stand corrected Darryl.  Right as per your usual --- I think you might see from my response to Barry, the whole thing is a personal frustration, and shouldn't be aired online :)

Thanks to both you and Barry for pulling my head in!
Cheers

----------


## Darryl Meister

MarySue, I completely understand your frustrations. Just keep in mind that they're not optometry's fault, at least not in the US. ;)

----------


## optical24/7

> MarySue, I completely understand your frustrations. Just keep in mind that they're not optometry's fault, at least not in the US. ;)


 

Darryl, this is the first thing I've read of yours that I disagree with. Name me one local, state or national optometric society that promotes encourages or helps support licensure in non-licensed states. I know many OD's that support it personally, but their organizations do not. They fight it.

I'm also the first one to say that opticians have put themselves in their position. Many enter the field because it is relatively easy to get into. Many more enter it only until they "get a real" job. The apathy of opticians is pathetic. But what put them in their apathetic state? It's the constant David vs Goliath state of mind that has set in from consistantly getting shot down. I'll echo what I hear from seasoned opticians in my state and others. "Why try? We don't have the money or political clout to fight". Why do we have to "fight" for licensure? 

 The only way opticianry will rise to a professional level is with manditory education and licensure. But how many opticians actively standup for this? I can tell you that in my state, very, very few do...

 The sad fact is that when licensure comes, it will be because a few dedicated people work for it. And then those people will be more despised by their states fellow "opticians" (re: frame stylists) than by the other two "O's" because they will be forced to actually learn and demonstrate their competence to stay in the field.



hijack/rant/mode; off

----------


## Jacqui

Ditto what 24/7 said, at least from us up here in Minnisota.

And now back to the subject.

----------


## HarryChiling

Great post 24/7 and from my perspective your right very few opticians will respect you the more education you get, but those are not the ones you want to be hanging out with anyway.  I find that optometrists tend to respect opticians with education even when they don't support it.

----------


## MarySue

> Great post 24/7 and from my perspective your right very few opticians will respect you the more education you get, but those are not the ones you want to be hanging out with anyway. I find that optometrists tend to respect opticians with education even when they don't support it.


If those of us who do have "registration" or "licensure" banded our resources, we could work towards a standadrd of education for all opticians.  The sad thing is in my country, we can't even call ourselves opticians.  

Caroline MacIsaac-Powers of the College of Opticians in Ontario has in the past promoted this concept of standardisation, joining together to set a higher standard, etc.: at all Vision Expos in the States, with very low turnout.  I suspect 24/7's suggestion of apathy is undeniably true.

What can those of us around the world who want to see a furthering of skills and standards do?  I for one would help out in any way my personal resources allowed.  :cheers:

----------


## Darryl Meister

I usually stay with from political issues, since I generally try to remain as objective and impartial in this forum as possible, but in the spirit of friendly debate...




> Name me one local, state or national optometric society that promotes encourages or helps support licensure in non-licensed states... They fight it.


Before describing my personal experiences in this matter, I will first pose this question to you: Is Optometry responsible for the success, or failure, of Opticianry? Is Ophthalmology responsible for the success or failure of Optometry?

Optometry has made a great deal of progress over the past few decades with arguably even greater resistance from Ophthalmology. Of course, Opticianry has access to the same legislative opportunities that Optometry and Ophthalmology have.

And it isn't just about money... It's about convincing policy makers that licensure is in the best interest of consumers. While money certainly helps, plenty of policies get pushed through by the "little guys." Just as Optometry has done on several occasions when expanding their own scope of practice, without concessions from Ophthalmology or Opticianry.

I would argue that Opticianry's best hope of success is working _with_ Optometry, not slinging rocks at them, to play on your David versus Goliath analogy. I would also assert that convincing Optometry of the benefits for both patients _and optometrists_ could have gone a long way in driving licensing initiatives for Opticianry.

As for my own personal experience... I was actually on the board of directors of the Opticians Association of Missouri when we were finally on the brink of pushing a licensure bill through state legislation. The state optometry association was actually willing to _support_ our bill under only one condition: They did not want us to include contact lens fitting.

Mind you, opticians in Missouri were not allowed to fit contact lenses in the first place, so this would not have been some great sacrifice if it meant at least legitimizing opticianry and spectacle dispensing. Nevertheless, several of the key decision makers in our organization refused to agree to this compromise with the optometrists, instead pursuing an "all or nothing" campaign strategy.

It should come as no great surprise that our bill was eventually shot down. And the Opticians Association of Missouri eventually disbanded. Opticians in Missouri will not enjoy the benefits of licensed professionals anytime soon. But when I look at how close we came to convincing our state legislators to pull the trigger on licensing for opticians, I don't blame Optometry.




> I'm also the first one to say that opticians have put themselves in their position... But how many opticians actively standup for this? I can tell you that in my state, very, very few do... The sad fact is that when licensure comes, it will be because a few dedicated people work for it...


I don't necessarily disagree with any of these points. I think they echo my own feelings, which I alluded to with my original comment. I will end with a link to an article available on OptiBoard that I think all opticians should read: Opticianry at a Crossroads, which was actually written by an optometrist.

----------


## fjpod

I'm happy to see a civilized debate on this subject.  

I'm lucky, I guess.  NY has had licensed opticians since I don't know when.  We would not be able to run our practice as well as we do without licensed, knowledgeable staff.  One of our four licensed opticians is a partner in the practice.

Having been a part of the optometric association in NY, I can tell you that we do not sit around a table and try to think up ways in which we can thwart opticianry.  Turf issues have come up in the past, but the biggest arena of turf battles is between optometry and medicine, specifically ophthalmology.  Have we agreed on all aspects of scope of practice, I'm sure not, but the lines have been drawn long ago, and back biting is not well regarded in the State Board structure of our professions.  I can tell you that any scope of practice expansions that optometry has enjoyed in NY have been based on proving (to the point of exhaustion) that the profession had the educational base in place first.  Don't go down the path that optometry holds economic advantage over opticianry, because the state will do nothing to enhance any professions economic situation.  It must be proven that change will enhance the well being of the public.

Someone will pop up and say that we don't support optician refracting.  I suppose you are right on this one, but since this overlaps with optometry's longstanding definition of being refractionists, it will be hard to overturn...  Optometry was able to break into the field of medicine and treat eye disease.  We did have to accept a great deal of limitations, BTW.  Many of these have been eliminated as time went on.  Opticianry will have to lead their fight on this one.  You'll get resistance from optometry, but optometry knows better than to act like a bunch of jerks.

I can tell you that today, in one of opticianry's premier programs in NYC, that opticians are being trained not only in traditional ophthalmic dispensing, but also in ophthalmic technicianry, such as refracting and auto-refracting, biomicroscopy, keratometry, and other forms of data collection and interpretation.  This has made opticians more employable, and I would say, better able to take advantage of opportunities in the job marketplace.  

Sure, my statements represent MY global view of the subject at hand, but I hope some see where I am coming from.

----------


## YrahG

This thread is not relevent to this section of the forum.  This topic has always been posionous.  This thread will inevitably end in poor taste, I hope that it ends now rather than continues.

----------


## kcount

Cudo's to all that have posted! Your replies have been thought out and eqully infomative and entertaining. Is there anything better than a healthy debate?!

In this mind I ask a question. Given that we can all agree that licensure is as much aneeded if not anticipated thing, is a national argument for licensure being forever delayed by our own lack of unification? 

In the last newsletter from the OAA the general message was more about who was going to chair what committee than where the association was making in-roads. (One chairperson even suggested that to combate VSP opticains should sell half of their practices to an OD! but this is another discussion) There were no comments regarding the new Health Reform legislation or comments about how the OAA was working towards some sort of goal. There was a bit about trying to protect the name "Optician" and only allow certified professionals to use the title. (I'm not sure how you enforce something like this but the OAA is very proud to have won a 'Strawman' victory)

Opticianry has evolved/devolved greatly in the last 22 years I have been practicing. When I look around at fellow 'Opticians' I don't see the professionals I was with when I started, I see part time housewives, college students working towards something else, and the occasional professional that has been beaten down to think they cant survive unless under a Dr's shingle. When I started I was with Professional Opticains, people that enjoyed the optical field, that enjoyed the process of being an optician.

This year I opened my own office, I have no doctor and no staff, I am litterally on my own. I am an Opticiary with all that entails. The recent trend would say that my days are numbered, that the wolves at my door shall be bursting in to shutter my windows at any moment, but I'm here and patients are coming in.

I'm am still hopeful opticianry will turn the corner and become greater than what it is, maybe even greater than what it was. Without a unified message, one voice to carry to the people and the legislature, the cause is lost and opticans will simply fade into history. 

KC

----------


## Barry Santini

> Opticianry has evolved/devolved greatly in the last 22 years I have been practicing. When I look around at fellow 'Opticians' I don't see the professionals I was with when I started, I see part time housewives, college students working towards something else, and the occasional professional that has been beaten down to think they cant survive unless under a Dr's shingle. When I started I was with Professional Opticains, people that enjoyed the optical field, that enjoyed the process of being an optician.
> 
> This year I opened my own office, I have no doctor and no staff, I am litterally on my own. I am an Opticiary with all that entails. The recent trend would say that my days are numbered, that the wolves at my door shall be bursting in to shutter my windows at any moment, but I'm here and patients are coming in.
> 
> I'm am still hopeful opticianry will turn the corner and become greater than what it is, maybe even greater than what it was. Without a unified message, one voice to carry to the people and the legislature, the cause is lost and opticans will simply fade into history. 
> 
> KC


Yes, you're right in so many ways.

Opticianry is like playing the saxophone. Easy to pick up. Hard to master.

Don't worry about a unified voice. It ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes. There aren't enough clear thinkers that agree to support the movement.

Watch your own back. Do your own thing. Keep delivering the best you can. Adjust your lifestyle to fit the economics.

You'll be fine, and you'll enjoy what you do.

Barry

----------


## kcount

thanks for the vote of confidence Barry. Always enjoy your posts. Would love to pick your brain somday regarding the freeform PALS's. I simply dont know enough to feel confortable about selling/dispencing them.

Now, I'm off to fret about display lighting.

KC

----------


## Darryl Meister

> This thread is not relevent to this section of the forum. This topic has always been posionous


Which is why I chose to let it remain in the Ophthalmic Optics forum, where I am confident that the posts will remain both well thought out and respectful.

----------


## Wes

> Which is why I chose to let it remain in the Ophthalmic Optics forum, where I am confident that the posts will remain both well thought out and respectful.


...where only the best and brightest ever dare venture!

----------


## Darryl Meister

> where only the best and brightest ever dare venture!


Yes, that goes without saying, of course. ;)

----------


## rbaker

> Darryl, this is the first thing I've read of yours that I disagree with. Name me one local, state or national optometric society that promotes encourages or helps support licensure in non-licensed states. I know many OD's that support it personally, but their organizations do not. They fight it.
> 
> I'm also the first one to say that opticians have put themselves in their position. Many enter the field because it is relatively easy to get into. Many more enter it only until they "get a real" job. The apathy of opticians is pathetic. But what put them in their apathetic state? It's the constant David vs Goliath state of mind that has set in from consistantly getting shot down. I'll echo what I hear from seasoned opticians in my state and others. "Why try? We don't have the money or political clout to fight". Why do we have to "fight" for licensure? 
> 
>  The only way opticianry will rise to a professional level is with manditory education and licensure. But how many opticians actively standup for this? I can tell you that in my state, very, very few do...
> 
>  The sad fact is that when licensure comes, it will be because a few dedicated people work for it. And then those people will be more despised by their states fellow "opticians" (re: frame stylists) than by the other two "O's" because they will be forced to actually learn and demonstrate their competence to stay in the field.
> 
> hijack/rant/mode; off


I said this in the sixties. 

I said this in the seventies

I said this in the eighties

I said this in the nineties

I said this into the new millennium.

I ain't saying it anymore - saving my breath. No one is listening.

----------


## Striderswife

> May I ask why an optometrist needs to understand lens design? Do you work with opticians? Have you made the wrong career choice?


I know I'm a little late to join this thread, but I just came across it, and had a view to share. It may be simple and may sound naive, but I think it fits.

I've always kind of thought of myself as a pharmacist for vision correction. Just the same as you go to your physician to diagnose you, then he gives you a prescription, and you take it to the pharmacist who fills it. I worked in a pharmacy for a year in college (the only thing I've ever done besides opticianry), and for the most part, the pharmacist knows more about the drugs he provides than the doctor. The doctor definately needs to know the ins and outs of the medications he prescribes, but with new drugs coming out all the time, they mostly get this from reps that stop by to drop off pens and pads of paper and other trinkets. If I have a question about a medication, I call my pharmacist first.

In the same light, ODs and MDs will need to know how the patient is expected to see out of the correction, but it's up to the optician to communicate with the patient to help decide the style of lens (Prog? FT?) and other aspects of their eyewear that are optional. We all have to work together. I depend on the doctors to write me an accurate prescription that's going to work. The doctors depend on me to fill the prescription in such a way that the patient achieves their best correction. The patient just wants to see clearly (and might as well look great, too).

----------


## optical24/7

We have a unique situation in Texas. Arguably, we are the closest state to getting mandatory licensure next. We have voluntary registration in the state. We got that out of a compromise 10 years ago after an interim study done by the state showed the importance of educating and registering opticianry tasks. We went from a high of almost 3000 (most thought this would lead to Licensure, thus the large number) opticians registered to little more than 300 today. It is clear that voluntary registration does not accomplish the intended goal of insuring competence in the field.

 We also have other unique things going on here. Lens duplication, CL fittings and refraction ability with MD write off. I know many opticians that fit CLs out of their location, referred by an MD that doesnt want to fool with them. Many of these same opticians are allowed to re-refract for fitting reasons or trouble-shooting patients that are non-adapting to the MDs Rx. All perfectly legal here. Unlike the case in Missouri, why would any profession wish to legislate itself out of the opportunity to expand scope or take away abilities already practiced?

 Barry is quite right. Even the states that have licensure today dont agree enough to have reciprocity between themselves. We are a long way from having anything meaningful or united on a national basis.

So, we states are left to fend for ourselves. We must take a page from OptometryEducate, then legislate. And to be honest with you, I have nothing personal to gain from licensure. In fact, a seasoned and educated optician has an edge in non-licensed states. I can point to my credentials and point out my expertise to clients, and ask if they have seen the same elsewhere. With the mediocrity of opticianry out there today, its tough not to stand out. 

 I am thankful for this meaningful and respectful discussion.

----------


## Darryl Meister

> CL fittings and refraction ability with MD write off. I know many opticians that fit CL’s out of their location, referred by an MD that doesn’t want to fool with them. Many of these same opticians are allowed to re-refract for fitting reasons or trouble-shooting patients that are non-adapting to the MD’s Rx...All perfectly legal here.


The presence or lack of a license for opticians does not preclude anyone from continuing to work under the supervision of a licensed ophthalmologist. Even in your example with Texas, opticians are not legally permitted to sign off on the final contact lens fitting specifications, themselves. Otherwise, this would represent _prescribing_ contact lenses.




> Unlike the case in Missouri, why would any profession wish to legislate itself out of the opportunity to expand scope or take away abilities already practiced?


Removing a contact lens fitting provision from such a bill would not be changing the status quo one way or the other. If opticians could fit contact lenses under the supervision of another professional in the first place, which they often can, this would continue to be the case had such a bill been enacted. It is not limiting the scope of opticianry, it is just not expanding it to include independently prescribing contact lenses.

Optometry became licensed professionals with a limited scope of practice first. Then, eventually, and only after establishing a significiant base of specially trained optometrists, optometrists fought successfully to expand their scope of practice. They did _not_ start demanding concessions such as DPA and TPA right out of the gate.

----------


## HarryChiling

If I may add there is also major divides in many areas of our profession.  Educated/Certified/Uneducated, even among different schools; licensed/unlicensed states; old opticians/ new opticians; I could go on.  Their is only retail chains as opposition now, they are stronger as a group and at this point I don't see optometry as opposition because they really don't need to be why would they waste one iota of energy on a group that has been legislatively stagnant for decades.  At this point the profession needs support in my opinion.  Education is a pipe dream since no school will offer a program without people to fill classes and no people will fill classes since you can get into the field without an education. Classic chicken and egg conundrum.

----------


## optical24/7

> ..... 
> Optometry became licensed professionals with a limited scope of practice first. Then, eventually, and only after establishing a significiant base of specially trained optometrists, optometrists fought successfully to expand their scope of practice. They did _not_ start demanding concessions such as DPA and TPA right out of the gate.


 
 I agree with you Darryl. We're not looking to expand scope with our bill. Simply amending our volunary bill to mandatory. Sounds simple, right? Since you've been there, I won't get into the resistance to change that goes into all politics, concessions are expected. We can't step backwards on what we already can do. 

 When politicians and the public are told that opticians are not licensed in your state, or require even a high school education...That only a pulse is  required to call yourself an optician, their mouths drop. Most think opticianry is a degreed position. 

 I've done some informal polling, and opticians make the vast majority of lens design reccommendations for their patients. Also measure, order and verify final product, fit and confirm patient satisfaction with the result. Is it not common sense that a person with this responsibilty have accountable training, certification, and licensure? ( I know, in here, I'm preachin' to the choir..) 

 And Harry, you'd be surprised by what big chain would like to see licensure, and reciprocity between states. I even attended a recent CE class that a walmart employee was taking. Their district manager is encouraging all personel to get an ABOC. So there are at least 2 chains promoting education. 

Licensure will come. But, unfortunately, there will be a fight...On such a common sense issue...

----------


## MarySue

> Removing a contact lens fitting provision from such a bill would not be changing the status quo one way or the other. If opticians could fit contact lenses under the supervision of another professional in the first place, which they often can, this would continue to be the case had such a bill been enacted. It is not limiting the scope of opticianry, it is just not expanding it to include independently prescribing contact lenses.
> 
> Optometry became licensed professionals with a limited scope of practice first. Then, eventually, and only after establishing a significiant base of specially trained optometrists, optometrists fought successfully to expand their scope of practice. They did _not_ start demanding concessions such as DPA and TPA right out of the gate.


I still think the problems lie within opticianry. You have two sides on this debate, imho. First the die hards who insist on all or nothing (your experience it appears was controlled by this first group.) The others who say, "don't rock the boat, at least we're working.)

In NZ, we approached the optometry association asking for their advice and assistance on applying for an increase in scopes of practice. We were met with polite replies and positive nods from most, however the outcome wasn't didn't match the response from the optometry association's board.

To sum up our position: we hoped to be able to 'refract under supervision' - no contact fitting, and no prescribing. The benefit would be to the rural areas where one day visits often see an optometrist faced with 100 people waiting to be seen.

In eight years time, approximately 8 graduates were estimated.

With the Durban Declaration announcing: 

153 million people in the world have impaired distance vision because of Uncorrected Refractive Error;Many millions more people over the age of 45 years have impaired near vision (presbyopia) due to Uncorrected Refractive Error;Persons with blindness and vision impairment are entitled to the same basic human rights as are enshrined in all national and international standards, declarations and conventions;Uncorrected Refractive Error drives children and adults further into poverty by limiting their opportunities to education, employment, and seriously impacts their quality of life and productivity;The link between poverty and visual impairment due to Uncorrected Refractive Error places a heavy economic burden on individuals, their families and communities;The paucity of services, personnel, training institutions, affordable glasses especially in the developing countries are the main contributing factors to Uncorrected Refractive Error.The course on refraction we wanted to us was already being taught by a reputible institution to dispensing opticians in Asia. We even wrote to the World Council for Optometry, and they reviewed our proposal. We again had asked for their input to help create a workable collegiate environment between opticianry and optometry, offering our country as a trial run, so to speak. We thought our timing was right.

We were wrong. 

.

Our country has 180 Dispensing Opticians, over 600 optometrists, and yet - we still failed in our attempt to work together and create something valuable.

I have the utmost respect for optometry, and their right to fight for what they believe is beneficial to the public. But, what will it take for opticians to realise that we need standards of care which are consistent: state to state, country to country?

If anyone has any ideas - I'd love to hear about "what we should do" not "why it won't work"

:cheers:

----------


## FVCCHRIS

I wish I could add something. But I can't. Politics almost always leads people to wonder why they even bothered. I wish you luck, although here in the U.S. I think Opticianry has some much more basic things to be concerned about. I can tell you're driven in your field. Don't let it drive you nuts! Remember what my old football coach said- "all anyone can ever ask is that you do your best". I hope your best is appreciated by the professionals you work alongside. :)

----------


## HarryChiling

> And Harry, you'd be surprised by what big chain would like to see licensure, and reciprocity between states. I even attended a recent CE class that a walmart employee was taking. Their district manager is encouraging all personel to get an ABOC. So there are at least 2 chains promoting education.


No I wouldn't be suprised, they're not looking for more licensed states they are looking for reciprocity and the ability to move their people across state lines to fill voids. I heard it from the horses mouth so it comes as no suprise to me. 

If I was to ever believe these corporations I would have to say what has stopped them in their fight for licensure? They have squashed every bill introduced in every non-licensed state for decades now, they have bankrupted legislative coffers across the country. What are they waiting for?

They want the ability to move their licensed professionals around the country, reciprocity. The current state of licensure doesn't allow that, and certain states are much stricter in their licensing than others. These corporations want the LCD the lowest common denominator, they would want the ABO as the licensing standard. I don't know enough about the ABO organization like their bylaws, their current staff, directors, and officers to put faith in them holding the keys to the promise land.

----------


## Comma

What do physicians, pharmacists, nurses, lawyers... have that we don't ?
Just think about it...
Licenses only ? Really ?

I live in a province (Quebec) in Canada with quite strong laws regarding opticians, full-time 3 years program, reserved title, reserved acts and so on, but we are treated about at the same level than those in unlicensed US states, why ?

Some hints : 

1-Standardized education (QC opticians have it)

2-High and respected level of education (QC opticians have it)

3-Known by the public. Nobody would ever think of dealing with someone that falsly pretend to be one. It should be EVIDENT and OBVIOUS to see a ***** about their ***** and NO ONE ELSE. (QC opticians DON'T have it)

4-What these professionnals are offering is considered as IMPORTANT (QC opticians DON'T have it)

That was just some suggestions...

So points 1 and 2 are useless without points 3 and 4.
QC opticians are a good exemple of this.

So education is just the first step. It worths NOTHING without recognition.
Even with all the licenses you can dream about.

What did opticians do to promote their own profession ?

We are just living the consequences of many decades of laziness, at almost all levels.
We took the easy way, so we are now easily replacable.
Who else are to blame ?
The other O's just took the place we let them take.

We are simply 40 years too late, imho

----------


## Darryl Meister

Oddly enough, Optometry has the most to gain by pushing opticianry licensure, in my opinion. After all, it places minimal burden on optometrists, financial or otherwise, since their dispensers would operate under their own optometry license in most cases.

Independent opticians and chain retail locations, on the other hand, would need to employ a sufficient number of licensed opticians, who generally command a higher salary compared to unlicensed opticians, which will impact overhead -- and, consequently, net profit -- at these businesses.

I don't know that anyone has ever actually posed such an argument to optometrists, however. At least I've never seen opticians express licensure, myself, in terms that would actually appeal to optometrists.

----------


## HarryChiling

> Oddly enough, Optometry has the most to gain by pushing opticianry licensure, in my opinion. After all, it places minimal burden on optometrists, financial or otherwise, since their dispensers would operate under their own optometry license in most cases.
> 
> Independent opticians and chain retail locations, on the other hand, would need to employ a sufficient number of licensed opticians, who generally command a higher salary compared to unlicensed opticians, which will impact overhead -- and, consequently, net profit -- at these businesses.
> 
> I don't know that anyone has ever actually posed such an argument to optometrists, however. At least I've never seen opticians express licensure, myself, in terms that would actually appeal to optometrists.


Great post, I in total agreement.

----------


## Roy R. Ferguson

Currently, opticianry is the only health related field that rejects college based education in favor of an un-defined, osmotic based, learning system.  Until a formal education component is embraced, opticianry will remain on the outskirts of the eyecare delivery system, unable to practice as true professionals, and blocked from advancement.  This is not the fault of Optometry or the chain firms, the blame rests solely with opticians as individuals and as a group.


The ABO/NCLE exams are generally derided as insultingly simple exercises that should never be considered for licensing purposes, yet the pass rate hovers in the 50% range.  On the practical side, basic tasks that fall squarely within the realm of opticianry elude mastery.  It has been my experience over the past few years that 52% of opticians cannot measure prism thinning in progressive lenses, 64% cannot measure the distance between prism reference points, 48% cannot split prism, and 12% cant identify the seg width of a bifocal.


Against this abysmal backdrop, its extremely difficult to argue for licensing or scope of practice expansion into contact lenses or refraction.  My suggestion would be for opticianry to finally embrace formal education and develop a base of knowledge from which to build.  Once upon a time I was optimistic this would happen.

Roy

----------


## spazz

> Currently, opticianry is the only health related field that rejects college based education in favor of an un-defined, osmotic based, learning system. Until a formal education component is embraced, opticianry will remain on the outskirts of the eyecare delivery system, unable to practice as true professionals, and blocked from advancement. This is not the fault of Optometry or the chain firms, the blame rests solely with opticians as individuals and as a group.
> 
> 
> The ABO/NCLE exams are generally derided as insultingly simple exercises that should never be considered for licensing purposes, yet the pass rate hovers in the 50% range. On the practical side, basic tasks that fall squarely within the realm of opticianry elude mastery. It has been my experience over the past few years that 52% of opticians cannot measure prism thinning in progressive lenses, 64% cannot measure the distance between prism reference points, 48% cannot split prism, and 12% cant identify the seg width of a bifocal.
> 
> 
> Against this abysmal backdrop, its extremely difficult to argue for licensing or scope of practice expansion into contact lenses or refraction. My suggestion would be for opticianry to finally embrace formal education and develop a base of knowledge from which to build. Once upon a time I was optimistic this would happen.
> 
> Roy


Couldn't have said it better! :cheers:

----------


## HarryChiling

The only opportunities for education that are available for opticians outside of licensed states are ones that our own leaders don't accept, ones that the licensed states don't accpept (COA Acrediting), ones that educators don't accept, and prohibitively expensive options.

Either a person can go to an out of state school and pay out of state tuition as well as have to fly there for exams at least 1 to 2 times a year. (Out of state tuition = $5,000 per semester ($20,000); In State Tuition = $1,500 per semester ($6,000)) (using numbers from Roane State since it's in your backyard)Attend a program online through a canadian school NAIT which is not accpeted by our leaders or licensed states. ($2,000 per year ($2,000) assuming ABO is accepted for the first year)Test out of a degree through unconventional methods in which case the ABO and NCLE together is accepted for 30 credits at some of the schools leaving the remainder of the credits for math, english, science, etc.  This option is not accpeted in licensed states either. (Out of State Tuition = $4,000 per semester ($8,000); In State Tuition = $3,000 per semester ($6,000) assuming that ABO and NCLE are accepted for 30 credits)The educators always want to say education is the key, it's only one component and just like the problem of opposition it has many layers as well.  Some schools are accepted by licensed states and others are not, like their is an ivy league amoung optical programs.  The cost for the COA Acredited schools per the examples given range from 2.5x to 10x the cost of other viable options.  The schools are a bit out of touch with the averae opticians needs, the Roane State University site even says:

http://www.roanestate.edu/keyword.as...ord=OPTICIANRY



> The average salary for opticians in East Tennessee is around $36,000 with starting salaries about $25,000.


If more opticians need to be educated before licensure can even be a possibility wouldn't the disparity in cost and acceptance of education need to be addressed.  

Number of issues their is no magic bullet, I think education is needed, but our countries education system has a set of problems all their own.

----------


## optical24/7

Rate of pay is more tied to the cost of living in your geo area than by licensure. Licensed states tend to pay more, but this is due to the cost of living index's of these states. I make way more in a metro area than my brothers and sisters in rural Texas. Same holds true for NYC vs rural NY. 

 Doctors, both OD and MD benifit by having highly trained staff. Less re-makes, better troubleshooting, patient satisfaction and retention, the list goes on. 

 One other area optician licensure could help all doctors is in the fight against on-line eyewear. When you have licensure laws that state that the final fit has to be approved by a licensed optician...they can't do that over the net. Why some of these states with licensure haven't gone after this illegal practice is beyond me...

 You can't mandate education without licensure. Licensure has to come first. Then you can ensure you have at least a basic level of training for all calling themselves opticians.

----------


## kcount

> You can't mandate education without licensure. Licensure has to come first. Then you can ensure you have at least a basic level of training for all calling themselves opticians.



OK, so taking your argument of Licensure before education:

I live in Illinois, an unlicensed state, In order for me to become a licensed optician if your argument were to be passed I would have o go back to school for some period of time to get a degree. What about the last 22 years I have been out here training, teaching, working, learning, leading?  
Under your program, I'm out of luck and have to close up shop. How do you  handle this situation? How do you take into account experiential learning for those already on the ground? This is where the argument has its core concerns. Its not the new young opticians coming in, its all the ones already here.  Do you grandfather them in? If you do that you nullify the license. Do you exclude them and tell them to start over? Then you loose support. Do you allow them a window of time to take prescribed CE to get on board. Oh, wait there's an idea! There was another organization in eyecare that did that.. now which one one is... oh never mind it will come to me. Oh wait that wont work because the organization that approves the CE is seen as a  bunch of numb-skulls that haven't figured out there Certification is worth less than the paper its printed on. At least in an unlicensed state.


As my mentor did before me, I will sit for my Masters exams and write my paper this coming year. I apprenticed under a Master Optician and now my time has come but being a Master Optician is a marketing piece, this is a business first and foremost. My proving my ability has little to do with a test and more to my being able to do it real time in. I have seen many a 'Certified Optician' that couldn't hold a screw driver. 

We convince ourselves that we are in a medical profession on par with Optometrists because it makes us feel better.  We are not. We are tradesmen and salespeople. we work in a retail environment that in some areas brushes on healthcare, but that is not our domain. Would it not be better to think of opticianry as more akin to an electrician or some other trade?  These trades have prescribed journeyman programs. Maybe instead of looking to Optometry for a blue print we should look to other trades for a formula to cohesion, licensure and sustainability.

This is all of course IMHO.

KC

----------


## Roy R. Ferguson

Opticianry is faced with three interlocked and formidable challenges.  The first is education.  Without education, there can be no meaningful professional advancement in a health related area.  The second is licensure.  The argument here centers around quantifiable knowledge and skills possessed by the field wishing to be licensed and how such a move will best protect the public.  If opticianry wishes licensure without education, it is necessary to convince state authorities that its internal training mechanism is so strong that formal education is unnecessary.  This is the third problem.  A reasonable and consistent base of knowledge simply does not exist.  This is one of the reasons a huge percentage of working opticians cannot demonstrate mastery of the most elementary of skills.

These are all issues that should have been addressed decades ago.  What we are currently discussing is the culmination of generations of feckless opticianry leadership choosing to punt this problem on down the road.  

Roy

----------


## Darryl Meister

I think there is an underlying misconception in some of these posts regarding licensure and formal education. They are not inextricably linked.To the best of my knowledge, no licensed state _requires_ a 2-year degree to obtain a license. There may be exceptions, but I believe this to be the general rule.

Sufficient apprenticeship experience -- e.g., 3 years of on-the-job training -- combined with a passing score on the written and/or practical exams will still earn you a license in many states. In fact, in many licensed states, I believe that you are _still_ required to pass the exams, even with a 2-year degree.

Consequently, a lack of opticianry programs or other forms of formal education does not preclude state licensure or vice versa, although formal education would certainly be required to expand the scope of practice of opticianry beyond basic spectacle dispensing.

----------


## MarySue

> Consequently, a lack of opticianry programs or other forms of formal education does not preclude state licensure or vice versa, although formal education would certainly be required to expand the scope of practice of opticianry beyond basic spectacle dispensing.


http://www.nfos.org/mission.asp

I found the above association. The list of schools is at http://www.nfos.org/schoolsindex.asp?SchoolState= ... The Mission for the site says: 

The National Federation of Opticianry Schools is an association of opticianry schools dedicated to facilitating the development of formal educational programs in identified areas of need; upgrading the standards of opticianry education; facilitating the exchange of teaching methods; working for the uniformity of formal education in opticianry; and aiding other national opticianry associations as deemed mutually beneficial.

----------


## fjpod

I think NJ requires an Associates Degree in Applied Optics.

----------


## MarySue

> I think NJ requires an Associates Degree in Applied Optics.


I'm all for a Bachelor's in Science - to mirror the ABDO model.

:)

----------


## MarySue

> I wish I could add something. But I can't. Politics almosy always leads people to wonder why they even bothered. I wish you luck, although here in the U.S. I think Opticianry has some much more basic things to be concerned about. I can tell you're driven in your field. Don't let it drive you nuts! Remember what my old football coach said- "all anyone can ever ask is that you do your best". I hope your best is appreciated by the professionals you work alongside. :)


FVCChris - Thanks for this - you're absolutely correct - I can only give my personal best, but I also play to win!  :D  Regardless of any appreciation, I am passionate about my patients, and absolutely hate the stories I hear over and over as I travel - clients who haven't been informed, don't know what they bought, aren't sure what it's supposed to do ... etc.

Thanks again Chris for the pep talk, sometimes I take myself way too seriously.:cheers:

----------


## YrahG

> I think there is an underlying misconception in some of these posts regarding licensure and formal education. They are not inextricably linked.To the best of my knowledge, no licensed state _requires_ a 2-year degree to obtain a license. There may be exceptions, but I believe this to be the general rule.
> 
> Sufficient apprenticeship experience -- e.g., 3 years of on-the-job training -- combined with a passing score on the written and/or practical exams will still earn you a license in many states. In fact, in many licensed states, I believe that you are _still_ required to pass the exams, even with a 2-year degree.
> 
> Consequently, a lack of opticianry programs or other forms of formal education does not preclude state licensure or vice versa, although formal education would certainly be required to expand the scope of practice of opticianry beyond basic spectacle dispensing.


Your right it doesn't but if n optician gets a degree, why should it matter if the school is COA Acredited or not?  In this current model the studentwould still have to complete an aprenticeship program and start from scratch just as a novice would.  Even though they would be more than likely a step ahead.

----------


## Darryl Meister

> why should it matter if the school is COA Acredited or not?


Academic accreditation ensures that schools offer consistent, quality education that meets minimum education standards. Without accreditation, anyone could open up a website with a shopping cart to sell degrees in opticianry, or any other field for that matter. And then what point would the degree serve?

The chances of someone receving the same level of education from a non-accredited school is unlikely, since this is typically not the lure of these programs, which more often than not focus on fast degrees with minimal participation. Besides, if the school actually meets the minimum education standards, there would be no reason not to seek accreditation.

----------


## fjpod

> I'm all for a Bachelor's in Science - to mirror the ABDO model.
> 
> :)


A NY licensed optician I know, with a BA in psychology, and many years of experience, was not allowed to sit for the licensing exam in NJ because she didn't have at least an AS in applied Optics.

Inter-state issues aside, there really should be a way for experience credentials to count for something.

----------


## YrahG

> Academic accreditation ensures that schools offer consistent, quality education that meets minimum education standards. Without accreditation, anyone could open up a website with a shopping cart to sell degrees in opticianry, or any other field for that matter. And then what point would the degree serve?
> 
> The chances of someone receving the same level of education from a non-accredited school is unlikely, since this is typically not the lure of these programs, which more often than not focus on fast degrees with minimal participation. Besides, if the school actually meets the minimum education standards, there would be no reason not to seek accreditation.


Accreditation comes from many organizations, the COA is a fairly new organization yet it is the accepted standard amoung licensed states for an education. These agencies are trusted bodies yet one of the COA's commissioners was caught buying a dimploma from a diploma mill as you suggested above. There are other avenues of education out there available to opticians, I would think if we want educated opticians we would start with more education before the process of whittling them down begins. Also keep in mind that many of the smaller schools and schools in unlicensed states will have a smaller pool of students to draw from and every cost incurred can make or break them. The unlicensed states again will be handicapped by the smaller pool of potential students, I can see a divide here.

----------


## Wes

> Great post 24/7 and from my perspective your right very few opticians will respect you the more education you get


They don't, in my experience. 

I work in a military optical lab, and have been affiliated with them since 93, so I've got quite a bit of time in this organization. There's a reason I'm telling you this. 

Many of my coworkers, especially the older seasoned ones say things like" why are you doing all of that?" When they see me studying or getting my higher certifications. Some even try to discourage me. The younger ones are either indifferent or supportive, depends on their mindset. The supervisors are nearly hostile. When I picked up my first AC last year, the lab chief said, and I quote "that aint gonna do you no good here". It has also been suggested to me that I should take my AC certification down from my desk because its pi$$ing folks off since it makes me look smarter than them. I have not taken it down. 

I wrote my masters paper and submitted it a few days ago, and when I told the "bosses" just a few minutes ago, the head boss didn't even blink. Didn't say a word. Just walked out of the lab and went home. 
This is the hostility I get for trying to excel.

As I've stated in other posts, if I could find another place thatd pay me like the govt, with similar benefits, I'd be out of here, but the compensation package is just too good to leave. 

Lack of education is clearly not the only problem, its also apathy, jealousy, and hostility to education.  
Wes

----------


## HarryChiling

> They don't, in my experience. 
> 
> I work in a military optical lab, and have been affiliated with them since 93, so I've got quite a bit of time in this organization. There's a reason I'm telling you this. 
> 
> Many of my coworkers, especially the older seasoned ones say things like" why are you doing all of that?" When they see me studying or getting my higher certifications. Some even try to discourage me. The younger ones are either indifferent or supportive, depends on their mindset. The supervisors are nearly hostile. When I picked up my first AC last year, the lab chief said, and I quote "that aint gonna do you no good here". It has also been suggested to me that I should take my AC certification down from my desk because its pi$$ing folks off since it makes me look smarter than them. I have not taken it down. 
> 
> I wrote my masters paper and submitted it a few days ago, and when I told the "bosses" just a few minutes ago, the head boss didn't even blink. Didn't say a word. Just walked out of the lab and went home. 
> This is the hostility I get for trying to excel.
> 
> ...


I could see why there were no programs available to the older generation and by the time there were many either felt they were too old for it to make a difference in their careers or they felt they were better.  I respect the ehck out of your drive, I love seeing bigger, better, badder opticians.  I like you think that their is hostility, these older folks also are the ones who consistently push for aprenticeship programs and the like look where that has gotten the profession.  I hear the number of years worn as a badge on a daily basis here and elsewhere yet the guy with the education is better off leaving their mouth shut around opticians.  We NEED education, but we don't WANT it.

Wes I'm f'in proud of you man.  E-mail me an address and I will send you a nice bottle of something or a cuban cigar if your a smoker.

----------


## wmcdonald

Dr. Ferguson is correct, as usual. Education must be required across all jurisdictions before Opticianry can be accepted as legitimate. Someone above mentioned that they were concerned that they would have to close up shop and go get a degree after some years of experience, which is a real concern to some, but not a valid one. What we must consider is improving the future Optician, which is where the requirements must increase. Those trained under the old formats cannot be expected to have to re-train. But even that is a problem. Those who were trained in apprenticeships seem not to want to see others get a degree they do not have. Again, an indication of a lack of understanding of the value of education. We must develop such an understanding across the country, as every other health-related field did years ago. Not just the technical aspects, but critical thinking, and other higher order skills. 

KCount above mentioned that we are a trade only, akin to the electrician and plumber, and if that is the case, then so be it. I do not think most here see themselves as merely "tradespeople", but strive for professional recognition. Remember, those master trainers are rare today, and even then can only provide the training they have mastered themselves. Opticianry is a multi-faceted field that demands we get more from our training than simply spectacle dispensing. It is more than making a pretty pair of spectacles, and requires a knowledge of optical principles I rarely see in continuing education session. He mentions Illinois, which has a fantastic Opticians Association that struggles to keep membership. In that beautiful state, it requires a single thing to be an Optician....... a pulse! The public is not being served very well by these folks who know very little. It is fine that you had your training, and I am sure you are a good Optician, but what about the others. It is about making sure the others receive an EDUCATION......different from training. Assuring the public that they are being cared for by a competent individual. You see us as a trade.......I see what we can become. Help us get out of the past, and think beyond the current hill to mountains we can still climb if we work together. If we receive the requisite education, then we can do more and licensure will be a legitimate need. 

A license is something designed to protect the public. As Darryl mentions above, it is not tied to education. In my state of NC, one of the toughest states in the country to get a license, we can still train as apprentices, and most do. Durham Tech graduates a number but the largest group annually to take the licensing exam is from the apprenticeship programs. Pass rates are abysmal because they do not get the necessary education! Many come to take the exam and have been doing what they do for a long time, expecting to pass. Eventually, when they learn what they do not know about the full scope of Opticianry tested for on the 2-day examination, they find appropriate material, study it and pass. That is not fair to those folks, and we should better prepare them in the first place. Unfortunately apprenticeship is nothing more than cheap labor in this field, and little training actually occurs. That is the fallacy of the system. 

What must happen is a standardization of the entire field across the board. A degree with a required internship, OR a well-designed training program in which those to enter the field all get the same knowledge should be instituted. It has to be accepted as valid across all jurisdictions, allowing Opticians to move from state to state. All states must institute licensure, once education is in place (remember, you must learn to drive before you get that license) and maybe then we will gain the stature we seek. In some cases, like Texas, where they have instituted a voluntary registration process with the state, a few of the thousands of Opticians there are banding together to make a difference and may just get a license without that education requirement, but it will generally be a prerequisite for licensure to occur. 

The problems.........poor leadership, and poorly motivated people. We have folks who lead the organizations, largely with no education themselves, who see education as unnecessary, and licensure as unachievable. We need radical change in the state and national organizations to provide real leadership into the future. What can we become, not what we are now should be the focus, and we are so mired in the current conundrum we cannot see beyond the current horizon. I often sound unappreciative of those volunteers who lead the organizations, and in truth, I am not. They do provide countless hours of service, which we must recognize and celebrate. BUT we do not elect the best people......they are anointed by those ahead of them by "coming up through the chairs". The leadership wants to be sure that those elected will appoint them to the correct boards with all the perks that follow, truth be told. Evidence is the long-standing folks on both the ABO/NCLE! Hell, we need a real election whereby people who have great ideas can present them to the people they serve. Currently, it is reversed. Developing new ideas is what I am talking about. It can't be worse than the current situation. The people follow the demands of the boards, and in reality have little voice. 

To the second concern: If you think about it, Opticians are well paid for what they do in most parts of the country. There is little difference between the salaries of licensed and unlicensed states (about 2500.00 a year according to my research). We are paid more than school teachers in most states and have very little in preparation in comparison. If we tout the income potential, and show we are moving in a positive direction, we will again attract the best and brightest.....not those who enter the field because it is easy! Now someone will chime in and say they work for $8.00/hour and that is all their state pays. If that is the case, you must have had tremendous difficulty finding anything else. which sounds like you may be in the wrong field, because you are well below the average in both my research and the NAO annual survey, which indicates around 40K across the country.

Enough of this......I almost did not post on this thread, because I have said these same things over and over again for many years. I do not see any significant change happening in my lifetime, but still do not give up. Maybe I am just obsessed, but I want Opticianry to reach its potential, as Optometry has done. I wish you all well in your optical endeavors and encourage you to thing beyond what is, to what could be if we only can develop a shared vision.

----------


## Wes

Dr. Ferguson and Dr. Mcdonald seem to be the major prominent voices in favor of further education.  I agree and support you, but I don't think it will ever be enough.  Too many "opticians" for too long have done just enough to get by.  They fear further licensure requirement, they fear education, they fear exposure as a "fraud".  

Before anyone gets their hackles up, I'm going to reiterate what I've said here many times:  Optiboarders, just by the very nature of their participation, represent the cream of the crop of opticans.  People that are here both want to learn, and share what they have learned.  I rarely encounter opticians like this in the "real world".  We often have differences of opinion, and that's ok.  If we all agreed on everything, this forum would be unnecessary, as it would just be a bunch of opticians patting each other on the back.  

And Harry, thanks.  That means a lot to me.  Hold on to that cuban until Feb.  and we can smoke a couple together.

Wes

----------


## rbaker

> Enough of this......I almost did not post on this thread, because i have said these same things over and over again for many years. I do not any significant change happening in my lifetime, but still do not give up. Maybe I am just obsessed, but I want Opticianry to reach its potential, as Optometry has done. I wish you all well in your optical endeavors and encourage you to thing beyond what is, to what could be if we only can develop a shared vision.


NOTE: I confine my comments to the opticianry in the USA. 

You are probably coming to the point in life that I did a number of years ago. Neither you nor I nor all the kings men can prevent the craft of opticianry from slipping further and further from what it once could have been. Many of us did our best 

Back before the formal school programs began the craft was passed down through apprenticeships. If you were fortunate enough to work under a talented master optician you became a talented optician. If you worked for a bufoo you became a buffoon. In many cases it was the blind leading the blind and it seems that in a Darwinian sense the buffoons were great in number and multiplied. In the sixties a few public schools sprang into being and did quite well. However, they were too few and provided terminal vocational education - that is to say you did not take traditional college courses and your credits were not transferable.

Some states were successful in playing the education card and did get licensing but most states were either unmotivated, unwilling or unable to push for state licensing.

Of course there were outside influences by optometry and ophthalmology and big opticianry all of which have conspired to reduce the requirements for a career in opticianry to merely a pulse.

So, in my opinion, the battle has been fought. The craft of Opticianry has been soundly defeated. Many of us old timers did our best but we were too few. We fought the good fight and now it is time to put down the petard and pick up the fly rod.

----------


## MarySue

> Many of my coworkers, especially the older seasoned ones say things like" why are you doing all of that?" When they see me studying or getting my higher certifications. Some even try to discourage me. The younger ones are either indifferent or supportive, depends on their mindset. The supervisors are nearly hostile. When I picked up my first AC last year, the lab chief said, and I quote "that aint gonna do you no good here". It has also been suggested to me that I should take my AC certification down from my desk because its pi$$ing folks off since it makes me look smarter than them. I have not taken it down. 
> 
> I wrote my masters paper and submitted it a few days ago, and when I told the "bosses" just a few minutes ago, the head boss didn't even blink. Didn't say a word. Just walked out of the lab and went home. 
> This is the hostility I get for trying to excel.


Wes - Bravo!  Keep learning, keep studying and improving your skill level.  Regardless of the benefits in place currently, the more you know, the more valuable you will be to your next place of employment.  I'll bet there are dozens of places willing to offer opportunities which exceed the benefits of the military, with far less risk!!!:cheers: 

Keep your focus  :Nerd:

----------


## Wes

> We fought the good fight and now it is time to put down the petard and pick up the fly rod.


Hey, Dick, I'm still in the fight, and I don't fly fish.  Maybe I'm missing out.  Take a break, you've earned it.  
Marysue, I'm not in the military anymore, but I do still work for them (DA CIV).  The most dangerous part of my day is the commute to work and back.

Opticianry in the US seems like it parallels that movie, Idiocracy.

----------


## MarySue

> To the second concern: If you think about it, Opticians are well paid for what they do in most parts of the country. There is little difference between the salaries of licensed and unlicensed states (about 2500.00 a year according to my research). We are paid more than school teachers in most states and have very little in preparation in comparison. If we tout the income potential, and show we are moving in a positive direction, we will again attract the best and brightest.....not those who enter the field because it is easy! Now someone will chime in and say they work for $8.00/hour and that is all their state pays. If that is the case, you must have had tremendous difficulty finding anything else. which sounds like you may be in the wrong field, because you are well below the average in both my research and the NAO annual survey, which indicates around 40K across the country.


This salary comparison is from http://www.jsr.vccs.edu/curriculum/p...icianryAAS.htm
It's my old school (graduated in 1983-licensed in VA in 1984, and registered in New Zealand in 1999) I found when I worked in the States that my VA pay packet was quite good for a basic 9-5 job, and when I returned to Illinois (non licensed state) I was offered a job at minimum wage running 4 stores. It was quite a difference in my mind, and the real reason that education needs to be standardised.

LocationPay
Period2006
United States                                                                            
Hourly                      Yearly                                                          
10% - $9.27             $19,300
25% - $11.33            $23,600
Median - $14.57        $30,300
75% - $18.73           $39,000
90% - $22.90           $47,600

Virginia                                                                            
Hourly                      Yearly                                                          
10% - $11.43             $23,800
25% - $15.13             $31,400
Median - $19.59         $40,700
75% - $23.67            $49,200
90% - $27.73            $57,700

----------


## MarySue

> Hey, Dick, I'm still in the fight, and I don't fly fish. Maybe I'm missing out. Take a break, you've earned it. 
> Marysue, I'm not in the military anymore, but I do still work for them (DA CIV). The most dangerous part of my day is the commute to work and back.
> 
> Opticianry in the US seems like it parallels that movie, Idiocracy.


There are only two places that I know of on the planet that understand the importance of education, standardisation, etc. --- Great Britain, and Ontario Canada --- kudos to them, and if they weren't so wet and cold, I consider picking up a fly rod myself and moving!

----------


## Darryl Meister

> Education must be required across all jurisdictions before Opticianry can be accepted as legitimate


I agree. But the only way to truly motivate education in this field at this point is through licensure. And apprenticeship and "grandfather clauses" to obtain a license will have to remain an alternative to formal education initially, simply because there is not a sufficient number of formally educated opticians in the job market.

There really is no other viable option. We can argue the merits of education all day, but it is a moot point without licensure, because only those who are already seeking voluntarily formal education would continue to pursue education unless it becomes a _barrier to entry_ to the profession.

Further, before expanding the scope of opticianry, a sufficient number of opticians in the job market must have ben exposed to the necessary education. The only successful progression of opticianry as a career is pretty straightforward, in my opinion, so I've been surprised to see so much arguing over it over the years:

1. Promote importance of training and ABO certification among state opticians and consumers.

2. Enact licensing requirements with both apprenticeship (with ABO) and formal education options.

3. Establish formal education programs, which should also include training in the curriculum for "future" competencies.

4. Expand scope of practice once a sufficient number of opticians with training in newer competencies are in the job market.

Is any of this possible at this point? I can't say. But I am pretty certain that the longer opticians fail to successfully push their professional agenda, the less likely this will happen. Policy makers are generally looking to deregulate industries, not regulate industries that have been coasting along just fine without government intervention.

----------


## drk

I tread carefully, here.

I appreciate the "improvement from within" mentality that you have.  I even think that optometry thinks that they've "improved from within".  I'm not so sure.

I'm of the cynical opinon that it comes down to power.  Not education, or licensure.

If opticianry gets sufficient marketshare, then it has all the power it needs to do whatever it wants.

Look for marketshare, first.

----------


## wmcdonald

_Is any of this possible at this point? I can't say. But I am pretty certain that the longer opticians fail to successfully push their professional agenda, the less likely this will happen. Policy makers are generally looking to deregulate industries, not regulate industries that have been coasting along just fine without government intervention. 

_Darryl,Licensure will never happen unless we expand scope in some manner. You are right, unless we show some real value to it, folks will not support it. With the current crop of folks who entered to field to find a job versus a profession, we may never advance beyond the current mess we are in, and in the end become completely unimportant......replaced by techs completely. We may be too late, and it is unfortunate. We could be so much more. I am proud of young men like you, who have learned well, and found your niche'. If we do not move quickly soon, it is all over. I look forward to this years OAA Leadership meeting in Memphis coming up next month. Lets see what the new leadership brings to the table. I hope it is more than the same old thing!  I continue to go, and always remain optimistic that we will be able to one day find new ground.

----------


## MarySue

> 1. Promote importance of training and ABO certification among state opticians and consumers.
> 
> 2. Enact licensing requirements with both apprenticeship (with ABO) and formal education options.
> 
> 3. Establish formal education programs, which should also include training in the curriculum for "future" competencies.
> 
> 4. Expand scope of practice once a sufficient number of opticians with training in newer competencies are in the job market.


Brilliant!  I've heard # 4 before but didn't understand exactly what it meant ... how do you get the training without the expansion and vice versa ... which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Taken in the context of this conversation thread, I've got it!  Eureka :idea:.

Thanks!
MSH

----------


## HarryChiling

> 1. Promote importance of training and ABO certification among state opticians and *consumers*.


The consumer would be the untapped market here, not many consumers know that their opticians are not educated, their was a link to a study here about what consumers thought and a majority thought that opticians had a bachelors.  They would be shocked had they known the truth.

----------


## Roy R. Ferguson

As most of the regular visitors to the site know, Dr. McDonald and I have been proponents of formal education and professional advancement for opticians for many years.  At this juncture, may be worthwhile to revisit some of the avenues I have created and offered to the opticians of Tennessee with absolutely no success.

The first was a college based certificate program for apprentices that could be used to complete an AAS degree.  Coupled with this was a degree competition program for the licensed opticians where college credit was granted for having earned the license.  The state society and the licensing board soundly trounced both plans.  A few years later, I designed a different program through another state college that met a similar fate.

Not wanting to admit total defeat, I then wrote and presented to the state society a college program granting college credit for the ABO/NCLE certification and a series of classes for the licensed optician, providing both continuing education and college credit.  Using this venue it would have been possible for the licensed optician in the state to procure an AAS in a couple of years or so.  By the way, cost for this degree route was minimal and readily accessible.  This too was rejected.

Later, in an effort to expand professional involvement, I designed and presented a PhotoScreening program to the state society that would have allowed opticians to work with the state Lions Club in the prevention of childhood blindness.  While other states are pursuing this model, Tennessee remains on the sidelines.

Finally, I wrote and proposed a vision screening certificate course to the state society.  This quickly died with no action.

While these results cannot be expanded to include all state societies and all opticians, it does provide some insight to the field in general.  Simply, when presented with a choice between ignorance and professional knowledge most opticians thus far have opted for the easiest route.

Roy

----------


## rbaker

Roy - http://www.orvis.com/fly-fishing

----------


## HarryChiling

> As most of the regular visitors to the site know, Dr. McDonald and I have been proponents of formal education and professional advancement for opticians for many years. At this juncture, may be worthwhile to revisit some of the avenues I have created and offered to the opticians of Tennessee with absolutely no success.
> 
> The first was a college based certificate program for apprentices that could be used to complete an AAS degree. Coupled with this was a degree competition program for the licensed opticians where college credit was granted for having earned the license. The state society and the licensing board soundly trounced both plans. A few years later, I designed a different program through another state college that met a similar fate.
> 
> Not wanting to admit total defeat, I then wrote and presented to the state society a college program granting college credit for the ABO/NCLE certification and a series of classes for the licensed optician, providing both continuing education and college credit. Using this venue it would have been possible for the licensed optician in the state to procure an AAS in a couple of years or so. By the way, cost for this degree route was minimal and readily accessible. This too was rejected.
> 
> Later, in an effort to expand professional involvement, I designed and presented a PhotoScreening program to the state society that would have allowed opticians to work with the state Lions Club in the prevention of childhood blindness. While other states are pursuing this model, Tennessee remains on the sidelines.
> 
> Finally, I wrote and proposed a vision screening certificate course to the state society. This quickly died with no action.
> ...


Roy,

TX has taken your photo screening and applied it to their society in the same way you had mentioned to me a few years back, I had told you I was interested and have compeleted 5 screenings in my area before it became difficult to obtain the photo paper.  I purchased it with the intent of getting a program off the ground and then passing it off to our state society, but they were not interested in new ideas and had their own agenda which did not include opticians.

Warren started a program where a school in Canada offered the very same thing you suggested a way to get credits for the ABO and NCLE towards a diploma, TX implemented it and is still running with it, Sam Johnson was in the first class along with me and few others the cost was affordable at $2k, and the option of taking it over the net with mid terms and finals being proctored by a professional in your geographic area was a huge step in making the program a viable option.  

Your state society and licensing board are fools, why would they want to destroy an available option?  Oh yeah, they don't have an education and don't want one.  How did these bafoons get into these leadership positions to begin with and how do we throw them out?

----------


## Roy R. Ferguson

Hi Dick:

Orvis and fly fishing would be a great suggestion for most folks.  Unfortunately I had to give up fishing once dynamite became so expensive and difficult to obtain.  My current water sports are related to search and rescue. Check out our website at www.tnsrta.org. 

Roy

----------


## Roy R. Ferguson

Fuji makes film that will fit the PhotoScreener.  The technology is a bit dated but it still works if you have a camera.  We still use ours with great success.

NAIT offers a great program for opticians.  Still, the field as a whole suffers from educational apathy and continues to ignore the huge deficit in actual competencies.  If opticians are unable to perform common opticianry related tasks, how can they ever expect to gain licensure or expand their scope of practice?  While the lack of a formal education component in opticianry is an impediment to professional growth; the breath and depth of ignorance is disastrous.

Roy

----------


## Wes

> Oh yeah, they don't have an education and don't want one.  How did these bafoons get into these leadership positions to begin with and how do we throw them out?


Its been my experience that most bufoons in leadership positions got there by butt-kissing, back-stabbing, and various other corrupt underhandednesses. These types of people rarely bother with learning their job; they advance through "other" means, and they rarely have anything other than their own interests at heart. They get hired/elected because they tell us what we want to hear.  I have worked with many like this In my years with the military.  I do still.  
Wes

----------


## Roy R. Ferguson

> its been my experience that most bufoons in leadership positions got there by butt-kissing, back-stabbing, and various other corrupt underhandednesses.


Ouch!

Roy

----------


## Wes

> Still, the field as a whole suffers from educational apathy and continues to ignore the huge deficit in actual competencies.  If opticians are unable to perform common opticianry related tasks, how can they ever expect to gain licensure or expand their scope of practice?  While the lack of a formal education component in opticianry is an impediment to professional growth; the breath and depth of ignorance is disastrous.
> 
> Roy


I wonder though, just how bad it is compared to other fields. It seems to me that I'm met with gross incompetence in multiple fields of practice from medicine to law enforcement, contractors to customer service. Sometimes I think that what is wrong with opticianry is what is wrong with our society as a whole. 
We no longer hold poor performers to a standard, instead we lower the standard. We tell everyone they're a winner. Our kids do poorer in comparison to other countries in math and sciences than they have since testing has been available. We're too fat and happy. Everything is me me me. Instant gratification and distractions to learning surround us. There are multiple fulfillment avenues for every vice possible. 
With this pool to draw from, the question is: why would opticians be capable?  In more than half of our states, neither a HS diploma nor a GED are a requirement to be a "optician". Clearly, with the lack of requirement for education and the possible money making potential of being in a so-called "professional" field, why WOULDN'T it attract a group of people generally looking for the path of least resistance?
Its not just opticians, its the declining imperial power (the USA) that they hail from. Wes

----------


## Wes

> Ouch!
> 
> Roy


Ouch is right Doc, and any highly qualified person knows it's the truth.

Let's hope your new test weeds out more of the incompetents than the old test did. In my state anyway. 
Here's a novel idea: I submit that opticians (and why not all healthcare professions) must requalify every three to five years!  Make em keep and own their skills rather than cram for a test the night before, pass, and then forget most of what they "learned" for the test and never bothering to further their opticianry education.  
Wes

----------


## Barry Santini

Ya know, the will of the people is to be heard...

and what I'm hearin', with my ear to the ground, is this whispering...

"We the people don't need no stinkin', educated, competanc'd opticians...

we done got the interent now...ha ha!"

B

----------


## MarySue

> Ya know, the will of the people is to be heard...
> 
> and what I'm hearin', with my ear to the ground, is this whispering...
> 
> "We the people don't need no stinkin', educated, competanc'd opticians...
> 
> we done got the interent now...ha ha!"
> 
> B


Barry - please wash those ears out with soap - they've been on the ground too long! :cheers:

----------


## Judy Canty

> Its been my experience that most bufoons in leadership positions got there by butt-kissing, back-stabbing, and various other corrupt underhandednesses. These types of people rarely bother with learning their job; they advance through "other" means, and they rarely have anything other than their own interests at heart. They get hired/elected because they tell us what we want to hear. I have worked with many like this In my years with the military. I do still. 
> Wes


I posted about this back in the '90's.  The same people run the organizations because by and large no one else wants to spend the time or the dues money to become active members of their respective professional organizations.  You get exactly what you paid for.  Unless you're actively engaged, you don't have a dog in the fight.

----------


## obxeyeguy

> I posted about this back in the '90's. The same people run the organizations because by and large no one else wants to spend the time or the dues money to become active members of their respective professional organizations. You get exactly what you paid for. Unless you're actively engaged, you don't have a dog in the fight.


Some very good points, but, some people are there to pursue their own personal agenda. They then form clics for said goals, and when if fact some newcomer gets in and bucks the "system", they vote them down continually. Frustration mounts, newcomer out, old guard finds someone to play with again.

I agree, you have to try, but it is extremly frustrating to go against the good old boys system and constantly get beat down.

I have been a member of the NCOA for about 10 years, and I have no clue where my dues go, or any of the money for that matter since I only receive info on the continuing Ed they put on. No info on what in fact they actually do for the opticians of NC, and that's sad.  That would explain why I see more opticians at the Ce's that are not members( your entrance cards are a different color) as they probably feel the same way.  

End of rant.

----------


## Judy Canty

Having been a part of the leadership of OAV and OAA, I can only advise you to either volunteer for a committee, or run for an office.  I started as a regional director for OAV and attended the OAA Leadership Conference to become involved at the national level.  It involves time and your own money, but I found the participation to be worth it.  I can tell you that no one is going to ask, because most don't know the individual members very well.  You'll have to jump in on your own.

I know we all talk about some hidden agenda or old boy network, but honestly, what advantage would be gotten from being President of an association that doesn't seem to accomplish much?  Any association is only as strong as its active membership allows it to be.  So, there are members and there are ACTIVE members.  The active members (usually a small percentage of the total) are the ones who seem to be re-electing each other every year or two.  The members are the ones who don't have the time or the inclination to do any more than write a check for their dues. 

All of you who are members of your state associations, try attending a board meeting as a guest, you might be surprised at what you learn.

----------


## MarySue

> Having been a part of the leadership of OAV and OAA, I can only advise you to either volunteer for a committee, or run for an office.  I started as a regional director for OAV and attended the OAA Leadership Conference to become involved at the national level.  It involves time and your own money, but I found the participation to be worth it.  I can tell you that no one is going to ask, because most don't know the individual members very well.  You'll have to jump in on your own.
> 
> I know we all talk about some hidden agenda or old boy network, but honestly, what advantage would be gotten from being President of an association that doesn't seem to accomplish much?  Any association is only as strong as its active membership allows it to be.  So, there are members and there are ACTIVE members.  The active members (usually a small percentage of the total) are the ones who seem to be re-electing each other every year or two.  The members are the ones who don't have the time or the inclination to do any more than write a check for their dues. 
> 
> All of you who are members of your state associations, try attending a board meeting as a guest, you might be surprised at what you learn.


Judy thanks for this - I was president of our National Association for 3 years, and we were moving towards positive change.  However, the new executive found it all a bit overwhelming, and things are focused more on learning and less on achieving advancement for D.O.'s in the country.  I also volunteer on the Professional Development Committee for our registration board reviewing the learning put forward for our CPD programme (Continuing Professional Development.)  So, saying that, I'm at a loss for where to next.  

I would love to be "active" in the association, but there are enough people working on education sessions for the conference, and the current executive hasn't put forward any information about their two year plan yet.  So wait and see I say.  Who knows, maybe I will be able to help again.

Keep up the great work.  Optics needs more people who are passionate about caring for the clients we see!  Well done.:bbg:

----------


## kcount

So, this morning while laying in bed thinking of how I needed to change the bucket on the egder and skimming through the stock market futures I began to think about this thread. Dont ask me why, its just how my strange head works. Anyway I started to think back to 'The Opticians Coalition'. 

Some of you may remember this it was back in the early to mid 90's (1995-1997) and the NAO and the OAA were going to finally bury the hatchet and stop fracturing the industry. Yes, education and political activism would go hand in hand and help define and protect Opticianry. Now, not being an insider to the conversations the idea crumbled almost as quickly as it started. But if you think about it Opticians came incredibly close to what we're all talking about here. A single message of the industry with capacity to define an optician. To protect opticianry and move it forward. Saddly the people who were in charge at the time failed and instead burried the hatchet in the coalition.

WE came close to defining ourselves as professionals and moving beyond being glorified sales people. *Thank you* the past leaders of the OAA and the NAO, great job.:hammer:
(then you wonder why I wont send in my dues to be a member.)

----------


## MarySue

> So, this morning while laying in bed thinking of how I needed to change the bucket on the egder and skimming through the stock market futures I began to think about this thread. Don't ask me why, its just how my strange head works. Anyway I started to think back to 'The Opticians Coalition'. 
> 
> Some of you may remember this it was back in the early to mid 90's (1995-1997) and the NAO and the OAA were going to finally bury the hatchet and stop fracturing the industry. Yes, education and political activism would go hand in hand and help define and protect Opticianry. Now, not being an insider to the conversations the idea crumbled almost as quickly as it started. But if you think about it Opticians came incredibly close to what we're all talking about here. A single message of the industry with capacity to define an optician. To protect opticianry and move it forward. Saddly the people who were in charge at the time failed and instead burried the hatchet in the coalition.
> 
> WE came close to defining ourselves as professionals and moving beyond being glorified sales people. *Thank you* the past leaders of the OAA and the NAO, great job.:hammer:
> (then you wonder why I wont send in my dues to be a member.)


Very strange thing to wake up thinking!  What did you have for dinner? Geno's stuffed Pizza??? - 

I don't think we should give up hope, or set aside big dreams.  What I do think we need to do is JOIN our local associations, and begin asking for change.  Talk to those on the Board of our associations, ask what is happening, where we can help - how it can begin.

As I've said before, the College of Opticians in Ontario really wants to spear head this.  They have the numbers, and resources - I think we need to contact them directly - each association, each state, each country --- whatever ... and see where we begin.

For me, it's getting those in my country to see the benefit, hopefully with the recent influx of British DO's we might have a chance. :cheers:

----------


## rbaker

The closest that we ever came to becoming recognized as a profession was back in the days of the Guild. Things were pretty good then as an independent business owner or as an employed Optician - so good in fact that we thought the goose would hang high forever. Apathy killed opticianry and unfortunately there is a lot more of that around today than yesterday.

If there is any hope of elevating independent opticianry as a craft it will be when real opticians learn that they must stand on their own two feet and not depend on state legislatures or licensing laws to bolster their position among the seven O's. As long as the buffoons who can't see beyond their own door sill are in charge opticianry will continue to be just be another species of mall trolls.

----------


## Fezz

> And Harry, thanks.  That means a lot to me.  Hold on to that cuban until Feb.  and we can smoke a couple together.
> 
> Wes



Sounds like a blast!

I am jealous!

 :cry: :cheers::cheers::cheers: :cry:

----------


## Wes

You can come too, as long as it's ok with Harry...

----------


## YrahG

> I don't think we should give up hope, or set aside big dreams. What I do think we need to do is JOIN our local associations, and begin asking for change. Talk to those on the Board of our associations, ask what is happening, where we can help - how it can begin.


I am sure that this doesn't apply for all the state societies but the experience aI have had with a few is that they want to succed but not using YOUR ideas. Every society wants to offer education and collect dues, but the education is "how to sell AR?", blah blah blah.

How to incorporate?How to get a loan?How to start on a shoestring budget?How to effectiuvely market an optical business?How to write a business plan?How to set goals and track progress?Bookkeeping (Quickbooks for opticals)Optical processes and procedures?Hows that for education, teach opticiasn to becoem independent.

----------


## kcount

> I am sure that this doesn't apply for all the state societies but the experience aI have had with a few is that they want to succed but not using YOUR ideas. Every society wants to offer education and collect dues, but the education is "how to sell AR?", blah blah blah.
> 
> How to incorporate?


] to your Accountant and a Business attorney, You can Incorporate on your own but your going to miss something. My lawyer cost $2000 in a High rent town.



> How to get a loan?


Try if you want I went to 3 banks but its also a tight financial market. Finally funded it from the Home equity and my Retirement. Thats not to say you cant get funding I know a guy who went to more than 12 banks before finding an investor. Remember no matter what your going to have to come up with at Min 20% of the total. You HAVE to have skin in the game.



> How to start on a shoestring budget?


Buy only what you need. The build out will cost 10-15% more than you think. Terms are your friend and ask for all the incentives you can get. Also look into the Plum card from American Express its designed for small business and give 1.25% off the bill if you pay it off in 10 days from receipt. 




> How to effectiuvely market an optical business?


Still working through this. Basically buy a Mailing list. Then send your old patients an announcement that your on your own. Your loyal fans will come to find you.



> How to write a business plan?


Check out the SBA web sight there are tutorials, classes, and software to help with this. Its time consuming but a MUST HAVE. You'll find out more about your idea than you can imagine. Ask everyone you meet about your idea. this is marketing and market testing at the same time.



> How to set goals and track progress?


Your Business plan helps with this. Its a tools to help you build, not the guid. your plans and goals are going to shift as you go along.



> Bookkeeping (Quickbooks for opticals)


I use Quickbooks for the accounting and Quickbooks POS for the storefront. Look into becomuing a ProAdvisor. Its cheaper and you get better support.




> Optical processes and procedures?


Spend some time in the business and you'll know this in one side and out the other. If you've managed a store/office you already know the day to day, now its a matter of state regulations for an OD (if your going to have one) and the zoning laws for your towne/village before you sign the lease. This was almost a problem for me.Hows that for education, teach opticiasn to becoem independent.[/QUOTE]
If I had a class on this it would have made life easier.

:cheers:

----------


## YrahG

> ] to your Accountant and a Business attorney, You can Incorporate on your own but your going to miss something. My lawyer cost $2000 in a High rent town.
> 
> Try if you want I went to 3 banks but its also a tight financial market. Finally funded it from the Home equity and my Retirement. Thats not to say you cant get funding I know a guy who went to more than 12 banks before finding an investor. Remember no matter what your going to have to come up with at Min 20% of the total. You HAVE to have skin in the game.
> 
> Buy only what you need. The build out will cost 10-15% more than you think. Terms are your friend and ask for all the incentives you can get. Also look into the Plum card from American Express its designed for small business and give 1.25% off the bill if you pay it off in 10 days from receipt. 
> 
> 
> Still working through this. Basically buy a Mailing list. Then send your old patients an announcement that your on your own. Your loyal fans will come to find you.
> 
> ...


If I had a class on this it would have made life easier.

:cheers:[/QUOTE]

You see the merits in courses like this.  Opticians have a few large disadvantages in this business:
Cannot write scriptsLow wages working for othersNot as respected among the O'sThese are just three quick ones.  The reason for pointing them out is by not having the ability to write scripts an optician must be able to market themselves better than the other O's in order to get business in the doors, or hire an OD which is costly especially in a start up.  Low wages means that it would take longer to get that "skin" that you mentioned to get in the game, and if the venture fails it may take longer to get another crack at it if it is even possible.  Not as respected among the O's means that a smaller percentage of the consumers are going to be searching your services out from the begining.

Now I'm not one of those, it's a horrible business to get into.  On the contrary I think that a skilled and educated optician has a great possibility of starting and maintaining a very succesful optical that provides a community a much needed service.  If the odds are stacked against an independent optician why wouldn't the societies make an effort to try and improve those odds.  Look the reality of the situation is that to keep puching for licensure keeps amounting to wasted dollars, time, and disgruntled members (of which I am one) to try and support optical professionals now that's something different.  

Every society values their firm members above all their dues are higher and their employees are often also members.  Knowing this why wouldn't the societies be taking an approach where they try t recruit new membership while at the same time try and hedge their bets by trying to create a new firm memeber.

BTW, great discussion.

----------


## kcount

Here's my offer, Someone tell me who to talk to to get in VEE, I'll put together a class on what it is to open an independant optical/opticianry. I agree with YAG the path is in a strong Independant Opticanary base. More owners means stability and ultimately market share.

----------


## fjpod

All of the respondents are giving good advice.  But the loss of independence is common to almost all professions and occupations.  Small mom and pop "retailers" have lost ground in whatever,...drug stores, restaurants, auto dealerships, jewelers, etc.  Large corporations like WalMart, Costco, have hurt the independence of lots of retailers.  

In our optical field, we have our own large behemoths that have swallowed up the business that was once performed by dozens of small retailers.  Some see this as progress.  Some see this as the demise of the American small businessman.

So I think you have to separate the concepts of indepence and professional recognition.

I don't have the answers...but let's take the example of nurses for a minute.  Very few of them are independant.  They generally work for hospitals, corporations, and doctors.  Does that make them "unprofessional".  Of course not.  

Lately, some are moving towards independence and setting up small practices as nurse practitioners (which I think is going to be a wave of the future, BTW, as physicians have become too specialized).  In any case, they are considered low on medical totem pole, but they are perceived by the public as compassionate, hard-working, capable and knowledgeable.  State laws and Medicine don't make it easy for them to advance.  Usually, a masters degree would be necessary to become a nurse practitioner.  

Maybe the problem with the optical business is it involves a product sold at retail.  

I also think many posters have been too hard on themselves.

----------


## MarySue

> I am sure that this doesn't apply for all the state societies but the experience aI have had with a few is that they want to succed but not using YOUR ideas. Every society wants to offer education and collect dues, but the education is "how to sell AR?", blah blah blah.
> 
> How to incorporate?How to get a loan?How to start on a shoestring budget?How to effectiuvely market an optical business?How to write a business plan?How to set goals and track progress?Bookkeeping (Quickbooks for opticals)Optical processes and procedures?Hows that for education, teach opticiasn to becoem independent.


I think Kcount has the right idea - education for business should come from business professionals, not physics and optics educators.

If you're really serious, start here:  http://www.sba.gov/smallbusinessplanner/index.html  and good luck!:)

----------


## YrahG

> I think Kcount has the right idea - education for business should come from business professionals, not physics and optics educators.
> 
> If you're really serious, start here: http://www.sba.gov/smallbusinessplanner/index.html and good luck!:)


This might come as a shock, but the educators here in the US that are teaching opticians don't always have their degree's in physics or optics.  A majority of them have a associates in optics and maybe a bachelors in teaching.  

As fo the folks lectureing their education varies even more with some having nothing more than a certification.  

If I wanted to learn how to run a successful optical business I would want a successful optician to show me the ropes not a business professional.

I do agree that it would be great to have an accountant teach a quickbooks course, or a lawyer teach a how to get incorporated course, but the real issue is provideing value to members and helping members see that their is more to this profession than working for the other guy.  The majority of independent opticians I see today talk like it's all over and if they had it to do over again they would have chosen another profession, yet opticians are starting new practices all the time.  We are our own enemies, we need to step aside and let ourselves be successful.

----------


## Fezz

> We are our own enemies, we need to step aside and let ourselves be successful.


 
I like this....I like this a lot!


:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## wmcdonald

As I have posted many times, we do have a pretty good deal, if you compare income and entry requirements. We still can be successful individually and professionally if we make some changes already discussed.

----------


## MarySue

> If I wanted to learn how to run a successful optical business I would want a successful optician to show me the ropes not a business professional.


Hi YRAH

Yes - exactly why I started my business 4 years ago www.hopperconsultants.co.nz

Too bad you're not a kiwi!

:cheers:

----------


## YrahG

> Hi YRAH
> 
> Yes - exactly why I started my business 4 years ago www.hopperconsultants.co.nz
> 
> Too bad you're not a kiwi!
> 
> :cheers:


MarySue,

I don't know you personally, but I would suggest you update your site's calender to either be current (currently 2 months behind) or remove the line that says "this page is updated weekly". If I could make a suggestion you could easily link it to a google calender which can then be updated through your cell phone or outlook software using google sync. My first consultation is free so no need to write a check. 

http://www.google.com/mobile/sync/
http://www.google.com/sync/index.html
http://code.google.com/apis/calendar/

I don't really see a need for consultants if the societies function as business incubators. Also consider this an optician who opens a B&M will have more invested than a consultant that pops up a website. If you had owned a successful optical business before than I would consider you to be the right person for the job, but as a consultant you collect your fees win, lose, or draw and have considerably less invested.

If you're ever in the US I could show you more than a few tricks to help you leverage current techologies.

----------


## YrahG

Another great course:
Web presence and implementing technology

----------


## MarySue

> MarySue,
> 
> I don't know you personally, but I would suggest you update your site's calender to either be current (currently 2 months behind) or remove the line that says "this page is updated weekly". If I could make a suggestion you could easily link it to a google calender which can then be updated through your cell phone or outlook software using google sync. My first consultation is free so no need to write a check. 
> 
> http://www.google.com/mobile/sync/
> http://www.google.com/sync/index.html
> http://code.google.com/apis/calendar/
> 
> I don't really see a need for consultants if the societies function as business incubators. Also consider this an optician who opens a B&M will have more invested than a consultant that pops up a website. If you had owned a successful optical business before than I would consider you to be the right person for the job, but as a consultant you collect your fees win, lose, or draw and have considerably less invested.
> ...


Ta - I am in the process of changing the whole thing at the moment.  I have very little wiggle room this year, and will be eliminating the calendar.   I use google calendar, great tool, but because I also run Office 2010 beta with One Note, I've lost the sync option for the calendar - I have to actually run side by side views and can't update the website automatically.  Thanks for the info, I really appreciate it.

----------


## YrahG

> Ta - I am in the process of changing the whole thing at the moment. I have very little wiggle room this year, and will be eliminating the calendar. I use google calendar, great tool, but because I also run Office 2010 beta with One Note, I've lost the sync option for the calendar - I have to actually run side by side views and can't update the website automatically. Thanks for the info, I really appreciate it.


If I can suggest, BETA software was never intended for production.  It is buggy that's why it is in it's BETA stage, you should run BETA software on computers that are not used for production or business.  With microsoft it's almost a must to wait for any SP1 pathces at least before moving to their new version software.

----------


## MarySue

> If I can suggest, BETA software was never intended for production. It is buggy that's why it is in it's BETA stage, you should run BETA software on computers that are not used for production or business. With microsoft it's almost a must to wait for any SP1 pathces at least before moving to their new version software.


 Hi Yrah - I appreciate the comment, but my lovely hubby is a beta tester CPT Microsoft - and I've lived with software like this since Windows 95 - we've have Windows 7 since it was code named Longhorn.  Ah the joys of having a genius for a husband.   :Nerd:

----------


## YrahG

> Hi Yrah - I appreciate the comment, but my lovely hubby is a beta tester CPT Microsoft - and I've lived with software like this since Windows 95 - we've have Windows 7 since it was code named Longhorn. Ah the joys of having a genius for a husband.


Windows XP/2003 Server = Whistler 
Windows Vista = Longhorn
Windows 7 = Blackcomb/Vienna

----------


## MarySue

> Windows XP/2003 Server = Whistler 
> Windows Vista = Longhorn
> Windows 7 = Blackcomb/Vienna


Thank heavens I'm not the beta tester.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/1393120

Hubby's interview with our local paper: (toward's bottom)
Hamilton software tester Colin Hopper, who has been putting Windows 7 Beta through its paces for nearly a year, said Windows 7 promised to be the best Microsoft operating system yet. :cheers:

----------


## rdcoach5

> I usually stay with from political issues, since I generally try to remain as objective and impartial in this forum as possible, but in the spirit of friendly debate...
> 
> 
> Before describing my personal experiences in this matter, I will first pose this question to you: Is Optometry responsible for the success, or failure, of Opticianry? Is Ophthalmology responsible for the success or failure of Optometry?
> 
> Optometry has made a great deal of progress over the past few decades with arguably even greater resistance from Ophthalmology. Of course, Opticianry has access to the same legislative opportunities that Optometry and Ophthalmology have.
> 
> And it isn't just about money... It's about convincing policy makers that licensure is in the best interest of consumers. While money certainly helps, plenty of policies get pushed through by the "little guys." Just as Optometry has done on several occasions when expanding their own scope of practice, without concessions from Ophthalmology or Opticianry.
> 
> ...


When hairdressers require licensure and opticians don't, who is to blame ? There are Optometrists behind this somewhere, trust me.

----------


## kcount

> I will end with a link to an article available on OptiBoard that I think all opticians should read: Opticianry at a Crossroads, which was actually written by an optometrist.


This may be one of the most depressing papers I have ever read. Cant say I agree with it in whole, but there are parts that are still accurate today.

----------


## Fezz

> When hairdressers require licensure and opticians don't, who is to blame ?


Hairdressers have to deal with many different chemicals and concoctions that can harm themselves and their clients if misused, applied incorrectly, or not properly cleaned off and disposed of.  

Until the optician can prove that harm can come from eyewear, I doubt that any possibility of licensure will exist. What harm exists? How will you prove that? Who would take any optician lead initiative seriousley seeing that there is no standardized educational foundation that proves some level of competence?

Opticians can not agree on what color the sky is let alone anything else that may prove helpful in the cause.

----------


## Judy Canty

> Opticians can not agree on what color the sky is let alone anything else that may prove helpful in the cause.


That's been my arguement for years.  We have met the enemy and he is us.

----------


## Wes

We talk about education and why things don't happen in this profession. I believe its because for the most part, we aren't formally educated. I'd guess around ten percent or less. I opened a poll in the gen discussion forum to see. Keep in mind, this group represents some of the better educated opticians out there.

----------


## wmcdonald

Review my series of articles in Eyecare Professional on the American Optician. I completed an exhaustive study and made specific recommendations discussed here many times. I think it may help with some of your questions. Untill we have a formal structure, and all Opticians have similar backgrounds, we will never be of one mind. Until we require a serious education, we will never again move ahead, but continue to decline. I appreciate Wes and his comments. He is right on target.

----------


## kcount

> Review my series of articles in Eyecare Professional on the American Optician. I completed an exhaustive study and made specific recommendations discussed here many times. I think it may help with some of your questions. Untill we have a formal structure, and all Opticians have similar backgrounds, we will never be of one mind. Until we require a serious education, we will never again move ahead, but continue to decline. I appreciate Wes and his comments. He is right on target.


 
Great articles and a must read for all opticians!

In Illinois licensure is blocked for this one reason, Education. The optician association refuses to put an education requirement in place. I have spoken to many an MD and OD that would support opticianry licensure but *only* with an education requirement. An Associates is not that hard or expensive to obtain.

----------


## Darryl Meister

> Hairdressers have to deal with many different chemicals and concoctions that can harm themselves and their clients if misused, applied incorrectly, or not properly cleaned off and disposed of.


Not to mention the use of sharp tools in close proximity to the customer.

----------


## Decades

It's only my opinion, but any physician must have a general understanding of the chemical make up of prescription medications and how they interact with the body, in order to accurately prescribe medicine to solve a medical problem. In the same way, Optometrists ought to have at least a working knowledge of how various prescription lens designs, materials and treatment technologies work, in order to PRESCRIBE the proper solution for the eye conditions that they diagnose. It's only my opinion...

----------


## MarySue

> It's only my opinion, but any physician must have a general understanding of the chemical make up of prescription medications and how they interact with the body, in order to accurately prescribe medicine to solve a medical problem. In the same way, Optometrists ought to have at least a working knowledge of how various prescription lens designs, materials and treatment technologies work, in order to PRESCRIBE the proper solution for the eye conditions that they diagnose. It's only my opinion...


Optometrists do have an understanding of the designs and how they work, but if they had to research every new lens development, ON TOP OF the diagnostic tests that are being developed, new therapeutic drugs to decipher, testing equipment which is evolving, and developments in contact lenses (orthoK, Keratoconic Scleral fitting, etc.) They'd never sleep.

----------

