The OAA and Our Future

[Jo]

The time of disappointment is over and it's now time for action.
-Ed De Gennaro, from the OptiBoard thread
Education and Professional Organizations > State Leadership meeting announcement (http://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2435)For those of you following "As OptiBoard Turns," you probably know we have had quite a few Opticianry threads that all point towards the need for strong national organization. However, there appears to be only a few of us posting about the subject.

I think we need a core organization to speak for us legislatively. If you don't think that is important go back and read the posts regarding the deregulation of a couple of states. Those state societies and others fight to keep Opticianry as a regulated profession. Wouldn't it be easier if all of us had that kind of national support?

In the past, some of us have expressed dissapointment at OAA; however, we have been promised changes recently by the new board. I see one problem with this. One of the allegations made was that the OAA was an "Old Boy" network. That may or may not have been true but there is one way to change that - new members. If any organization has a limited membership, of course it is easy to call it isolated. The only way to change that is by increasing the number of members. An organization with 1,000 members is not going to be as diverse as one with 10,000 members; that's just plain old math and statistics. We are the reason the OAA isn't been what we want it to be. (Note - I am not currently a member of the OAA)

My main questions is: Can the OAA lead Opticianry into the future?

I urge anyone who has a constructive opinion to please post it here.

[Cindy Hamlin]

JO,
It is ironic that I read you post today as I received a membership form from the OAA. I do have some questions if you or Judy can answer them for me.

What do I receive for my membership? (I don't mean the charge card, etc.) Do I get to attend meetings and vote or am I mailed details of the meeting they have and what is decided. I agree that sometimes organizations have an old-boy's network mentality, but that is because we pay our dues and have no say as to what occurs in our "behalf".

~Cindy

[stephanie]

Hi Jo, to be quite honest with you, I am not really sure what being a member means. What exactly is the problem with the organizations? I am sorry if I sound stupid but I really don't know. I am really confused by all of the membership to state org. and the oaa. I do know I am not pleased by everytime I turn around TN is in jeopardy of being deregulated. I did not work this hard to become licensed to have some politician take it from me. Please someone enlighten me!!

Steph

[Jo]

Good question ... as far as the OAA I do not honestly know. Perhaps Homer, Judy or Ed can tell us how the process works. That was basically the purpose of posting this thread. To find out how things work, to learn how we can create a positive change in our organizations and to hear what others in optics think. I am not a member of the OAA so I probably know as much about the actual workings of the organization as you do.

I do believe that if we can get a big enough voice together someone has to listen.

[stephanie]

What do you say we have a meeting here on Sunday (isn't that when chat is?) and discuss this very thing? I want to know specifics before I join anything. I want to be sure of what is in it for me and what I can do to help the organization before I decide what to do. Would love to hear everyone's input on this subject. I am actually surprised that not many others have replied yet.

Steph

[Cindy Hamlin]

Count me in on the chat, too! Can someone tell me what time it is and how I join? STEVE..........

~Cindy:D

[Jo]

I can join a chat at anytime on Sunday. It would be nice to have some official folks from the OAA there. I recieved that same membership application yesterday so now would be a good time for a question and answer session.

cah2020,
I forgot you were having a hard time getting into the chat room that other time. We may have to meet for a practice session; that way if you can't log on we can work out the bugs before the meeting. We should post the time for a trial chat log on so that others having difficulties accessing the chat room can also have time to work out the bugs.

Steve,
Is there a good time to meet for a practice chat log in so that we can yell if we need help?

[Steve Machol]

Jo,

I'm off and on the computer all day long. Pick a time and I'll try to be around.

[stephanie]

I just checked to see if I could figure out the chat and get it. I can so I will be there on Sunday. I am very interested in seeing what everyone has to say.


Steph

[Jo]

What's a good time on Sunday for you Steph?

[Cindy Hamlin]

I clicked on the Miscellaneous button on the top and clicked on the Optiboard chatroom button and nothing happened. Should something have happened or do I have to wait for a chat for it to open?

Pick a time Sunday and I will be there!

~Cindy

[Jo]

cah2020:

After clicking on the link you should be taken directly to the chat room. You should see a large blacke square on the left (the message area) and a menu down the right hand side. Below the message area and the bar you would use to type messages into should be a status bar. If everything is right it should say "Connected to chat server as user ________" if not something is wrong.

[Homer]

Joe, thankyou for your new stem on this subject. I'll attempt a response.

History is the story of how we got here. Although I hated the subject in school, I have come to the conclusion that without it we can know very little about how to get to where we want to go from here.

OAA was designed and built largely by independent owners of optical shops/dispensaries. Back in those days there were no national chains, there were no dispensing MD's and employees of optometrists were just that - they did not consider themselves opticians. These, granted mostly men, were leaders of state socities/associations which recognized the need for a national voice. The designed OAA as the national association of the states to protect, defend and promote opticianry at the national level. They gave great amounts of personal money and time to this endevor!

So at this time there were only two "houses". Firm Members and State society members. As opticianry became noticed by the corporations, some of the small state chains were purchased by corporations who bought them as a "cash cow" and a hedge against bad economic cycles. As the optical industry became more nationally corporate they also began to "infiltrate" the OAA.
Somewhere in 1990 oir 1991 the "old school" became very afraid and kicked out the national chains from firm membership.

This action greatly hurt membership in OAA. It became a financial problem! One of the "soutions" was to open up the membership to opticians who were, 1) in states that did not have assiciations, 2) in states that had association but of which they chose not to be a part. This greatly changed the demogratphics of the National Association.

So here we are now asking the question, "What do I get out of this membership in OAA?"
On my part, I have been a part of a state association which has been associated with OAA since 1975. I have not expected anything personal out of my membership - at least nothing I could take to the bank. What I did expect, was to be included in the discussion of opticianrys future and be informed as to its general direction - and most of all to associate with some very talanted opticians at the state and national level. In that way it has benefited me greatly.

I too have never been impressed with rental car discounts and credit card offers or membership cards (never had the occasion to actually show my membership card to anyone!)

The good-old-boy system is both mythical and real. If you are not involved anywhere along the line it is very real because you have not paid your dues and are not part of the discussion and so the decisions are made by those who have. It is mythical because we love to blame our present problems on some outside enemy.
It is real because we do have people with large egos at every level - some do not make good leaders. It is mythical because many in leadership have spent thousands of dollars a year making this organization of opticians continue.

It has been said many times on this forum that we need a national voice and an national organization. This could be IT for you. The choices are to come up the the millions of dolllars and millions of "man-hours" to start a new one in your own image OR to pay about 25 or 30 cents a day to make your state and national organization itno a very strong unit where a national disucssion can take place. (I personally think this should be between $1 & $2 per day)

I paraphrase a very famous saying: "Ask not what your association can do for you, but what you can do for your association!"

If you want great immeadiate benefits, join a buying club.

If you want to change the world of opticianry, buy a ticket and ride this wave.

Homer

[Jo]

Homer,

Can you give us some insight one how our voices would get heard?

From what I understand, if your state has an organization that is a Society Member, then a member from that Society is able to vote and represent its "state constiuents;" Individual Members, themselves, do not vote. Is this correct? If it is then you would have to be active in your state society to be heard. Not a bad thing; I am just trying to find out how everything works.

[Homer]

Jo, you are pretty much correct. However, individual members, as a group, could put forth a candidate for the OAA board of directors position dedicated to individual members. They can also select a person to vote at the General Assembly.

What we really want to see come back is some kind of "dual" membership where if you are a member of a state society you are also a member of OAA. This would bring about slightly different dynamics for the individuals.

However, to be really strong we really need to be supportive of a state society (in some cases maybe more than one) and that state society(s) needs to be supportive of OAA.

We have had some bickering, power plays and "i'm gona' take my marbles and go home" kind of attitudes. I really hope we can get beyond that.

Communication is the other big key. The Board not only needs to listen and respond, but treat the members as adults who have the right to be informed of all decisions. This is the goal of the membership committee - to make OAA more "user friendly".

This in no way counts out IOC! I think it could take OAA and opticianry to the next level.

Nonetheless, if opticians think that all of this is going to happen for $65 to $75 per year (average state society membership), we have another think comming. I think individuals should pay somewhere between $250 to $500 per year and firm members should pay between $1200 to 1500 per year. ( yah, I'm talking about me on the big bucks). It's just like our whole society today to think that we should be able can get a Panamic, Transitions with Crizal in a Cazal frame for about $199.00. If we think cheap, we will get cheap - look at the past 5 years.

Finally, we need to stop think of OAA as Mommy and/or Daddy who has all the money and ain't givin' us our share. OAA R US!
Going to a foster home ain't gona' fix the problem. We need to keep up this conversation and see where it leads.

Sorry for the too long answer. Other questions welcomed!

Homer

[Jo]

This in no way counts out IOC! I think it could take OAA and opticianry to the next level.I hope so. The IOC's purpose is to create consumer demand for service from licensed/certified opticians, you could call it a type of consumer and industy public relations council. The IOC is there to support the functions of national and state organizations and relate those organizations' accomplishments to the public and other opthalmic professionals in a way that makes them confident in opticians.

A few of us recieved a membership mailer during the week. Under the topic "What is the OAA?" it says the "OAA is the only national organization representing opticianry's business, professional, educational, legislative and regulatory interests." That is a great deal to take on. How does the OAA plan to do all of that effectively? What is currently in place to make advancements in any of these areas? Do you think the OAA can effectively represent opticians in all of these areas?

[Steve Machol]

Originally posted by Jo
The IOC's purpose is to create consumer demand for service from licensed/certified opticians, you could call it a type of consumer and industy public relations council.

This is exactly it! Well said Jo!

[Cindy Hamlin]

Homer,
I don't believe we can have a formidable presence in the optical community without the state societies and the national societies joining together as one. I have seen in my 12 plus years of optical experience a lot of pulling apart, but I am all for anything that brings us together!

Please tell us more!

~Cindy

[eddege]

Originally posted by Jo
For those of you following "As OptiBoard Turns," you probably know we have had quite a few Opticianry threads that all point towards the need for strong national organization. However, there appears to be only a few of us posting about the subject.



My main questions is: Can the OAA lead Opticianry into the future?

I urge anyone who has a constructive opinion to please post it here.


Jo:

The question isn't whether OAA can lead opticianry into the future, the question should be whether opticians are ready to lead themselves into the future. OAA is nothing more than its members. If people join it and demand changes, then OAA will change. If people don't join it, then nothing will and and OAA will likely fold.

As I stated in my earlier email announcing the state leadership meeting, the time for action is NOW. It's time to fix OAA or move on to something else. Personally, I think OAA needs to be restructured and revitalized so it can truly represent 21th century opticians and their diverse needs. But an organization is only a group of people and their collective wishes. What we need right now is participation from the state leaders in every state to come together at this coming leadership meeting to discuss the issues and begin making the decisions that will set OAA on its future course and but opticianry back on the right track.

Ed De Gennaro

PS ... the likely date for the leadership conference is Feb 1 & 2, 2002.

[Cindy Hamlin]

JO,
Steve helped me out and I downloaded the internet explorer 5.5 upgrade and I can now get into the chatroom. Have we determined a time for the chat on Sunday? The afternoon would be great for me (after 3pm) as I will be home from church and lunch by then.

~Cindy

[Dannyboy]

Over the years I have belonged to soo many organizations and have NEVER received anything in exchange other than some CE.
As far as the OAA and NAO are really out of touch with the average optician. I strongly believe that my primary duty is with my state society, then comes the others. The OAA is NOT ready at all to lead opticianry into the future.

My proposal for a fix is to give all the state societies a say so as to what are the requirements in their particular state for entry into the profession, thus requiring the states societies to define what they want as their educational standards. If you live for example in Florida and the Florida society agrees that they want all their entry opticians to have a Associates degree to be eligible for the ABO and the NCLE, then everyone who sits for the ABO or NCLE in Florida must have an Associates degree prior to allowing them to take the test. Thus it will automatically raise the bar without any legislation. States that have no interest in increasing their education then keep what we have. The ABO and NCLE would have to let these candidates know that the results are invalid unless they meet the states society requirements which should be clearly defined. We cannot fight an uphill battle if it is already lost. See we forget that these associations such as OAA, CLSA, NAO have a say so as to what is the bar that the ABO and NCLE has to require.....

Another idea that was told to me by an educator is to let the profession to be define by the highest standards in training, which is the colleges. If the ABO and the NCLE has to answer to them then we all know what the results should be. But if the OAA and NAO leaders have vested interests in keeping lower standard then I am definetly NOT interested in their membership.
I am not in a position to travel to every national convention but I most certainly can do my part in my state. The more democratic the better. Yep, the more I have a say so the better.

We have the solution in our hands. Lets be brave and do something about it. A terrific idea would be do it nationally but the forces of evil will not let them agree. Our leaders know exactly what the general opinion is about what should be done but .... Proof to us that you guys and gals in the top have no vested interest in keeping the profession the way it is. It is time for a change.

Dannyboy
Wicked as ever:o

[eddege]

Dannyboy:

You've got some good ideas here. Openness is a key part of putting opticianry back on track, so it a democractic process. The plan is to have a very participatory state leadership conference in Feb so that ALL opticianry state associations can come together and begin working on the strategies that will turn things around. I think a restructuring of OAA is inevitable ... but that will be decided by the leaders that attend the meeting. I also think there's got to be a very clear and attainable strategic plan that guides OAA's activities, not the executive committee, president or executive director. A strategic plan is continuous, the executive officers and the president change every year. One of OAA's problems ... in my opinion ... is a lack of continuity; they're not consistent. That's why state leaders get upset. One year things look like they're going in this direction, a couple of years later they go in that direction. You can't run an organization like that. It's got to stand for clearly defined and implemented objectives that the membership buys into. Without that, you might as well close the doors to the shop ... any shop.

The one thing you can do to help improve things right now is to make sure your state leaders (as many as possible) attend this leadership conference.

Ed De Gennaro

[Jo]

Dannyboy:

I think you are correct. If I read the OAA bylaws correctly, we need to be active in our State Association to effect a change on a national level. We are represented during OAA voting proceedures by State Society members. (Sorry, back on my soapbox for a second. This is why it is important to me that the Connecticut Opticians Association be recognized as a Member Society again. Any ideas if this may happen this year?)

I think there is a lack of continuity because Opticians, in general, have a hard time defining themselves and who they are. How can you organize a group of people that aren't clearly defined as a profession?

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by Jo
Dannyboy:

I think there is a lack of continuity because Opticians, in general, have a hard time defining themselves and who they are. How can you organize a group of people that aren't clearly defined as a profession?

I agree completely, Jo! I will step on my soapbox for a minute here...

We seem to have a tremendous amount of infighting here. I see (working with states along the east coast) different requirements for licensure between the states and different requirements for reciprosity-even among persons of like credentials, background and education. I received my license in Virginia through apprenticeship, since I have been an optician for about 8 years now, I couldn't be granted reciprosity in about three states I know of. Some states make getting a license an act of God and keeping it a herculean feat!

I agree there has to be continuity and common vision, but that won't be accomplished until, as Dannyboy said, first we get the state societies fixed and then we get them together on a national level. I have been on a few boards of directors of local interests and ego has to be put aside, "we have always done it this way", and "our way is the only way" and then and only then can we begin the open dialogue that will get us on the same page. Ed Degge maybe the State Leadership Conference's theme should be "CHECK YOUR EGOS AT THE DOOR!"

That's my truth and I am sticking to it!

~Cindy

[eddege]

"maybe the State Leadership Conference's theme should be "CHECK YOUR EGOS AT THE DOOR!"


Cindy:

That's exactly what we're telling everyone ... check you egos and your weapons at the door and come prepared to work hard on affecting change. Complaining is over. It's time consuming and unproductive. Let's start putting that energy to use in a positive way.

As far as defining opticians, it's not as complex as it appears. Just search for all the things we have in common and you'll see that there's plenty that binds us. Optometry licensing laws are very diverse but somehow they manage to cope.

Only we can change the status quo. The time as come for change. I hope everyone will be a part of it.

Ed De Gennaro

[chip anderson]

Depends on what the dues are spent as , if the OAA would have discussion boards like this one it would be a good plus. If the annual meetings were more than good bye parties for retireing members, it would be a plus. If we got more than "Fellow Polls" with pre decribed questions, like we do from CLSA. It would be a plus. If our E. Mails to the organizations were answered, if the polls and the things we would like to see the societies do were in open discussion instead of paths set out by the powers that be, this might make these good organizations.

If the organization is an elite group that sends out fliers, and organizies parties, $ 65.00 is too much. Both the CLSA and the OAA could have a lot more oportunity for member participation.

As to state associations, I can remember when (at that time you could buy our legislature for $ 5.00 a vote) I told our state assn. I would glady pay $5000.00 just for a license to continue doing what I was doing. At that time we had some very rich members and I was a salaried peon, and did I get anyone who would help support this, No!

Chip (Wish we had a smiley face sticking out his tounge) Anderson.

[Jo]

Chip,

Check the smilies to the left of your message screen when you post repies for what you are looking for.
:p

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by eddege
"maybe the State Leadership Conference's theme should be "CHECK YOUR EGOS AT THE DOOR!"


Cindy:

That's exactly what we're telling everyone ... check you egos and your weapons at the door and come prepared to work hard on affecting change. Complaining is over. It's time consuming and unproductive. Let's start putting that energy to use in a positive way.

As far as defining opticians, it's not as complex as it appears. Just search for all the things we have in common and you'll see that there's plenty that binds us. Optometry licensing laws are very diverse but somehow they manage to cope.

Only we can change the status quo. The time as come for change. I hope everyone will be a part of it.

Ed De Gennaro

I agree with all you have said here, Ed. Unfortunately, it isn't reality. We have a lot of in-fighting in our community. Even among our own profession. I applaud your optimism and I guess as has been said we cannot change without voices crying for change! I must admit I belong only to the NAO. I mainly do that for the discounted materials. I get a newsletter and have no idea after reading it what exactly the NAO does. I want to be a part of an organization that will listen to me and keep me informed as to what they do and decide in my behalf. If indeed the OAA is that kind of organization, I would be glad to join!

So let me know when it gets there!

~Cindy

[chip anderson]

The OAA, the CLSA and all of our other organizations must
1) Allow low cost access for entry level to below intermediate personell. I have worked at a number of places where only the owner could afford to take off and attend meetings, supposedly to relay the info to us peons. Of course he never got around to relaying the information.
2) We need to stop regarding educational material as proprietory, It's really nice when some of us can go around on the weekends and get a paid trip, and VIP treatment. But we need to video tape all this wonderfull knowledge and make the tapes available on a rental or buy for less than $ 10.00 per course. We are opticians, we are not in the business of education, but we help our own with same.
3)We need to be asked what we want the organizations to do for us, not be told what our benevolent elders have decided is the best road for us to take.



O.K. Let's hear from the opposition.

Chip

[Jo]

Originally posted by chip anderson
The OAA, the CLSA and all of our other organizations must
2) We need to stop regarding educational material as proprietory, It's really nice when some of us can go around on the weekends and get a paid trip, and VIP treatment. But we need to video tape all this wonderfull knowledge and make the tapes available on a rental or buy for less than $ 10.00 per course. We are opticians, we are not in the business of education, but we help our own with same.Chip, Connecticut has minimum continuing ed requirements in order to renew licensure. Those "Super Sundays" in CT are important to us. However, it is not a paid trip; we pay an admission fee.

[Jo]

Originally posted by cah2020


We have a lot of in-fighting in our community. Even among our own profession. I applaud your optimism and I guess as has been said we cannot change without voices crying for change!You are right Cindy! We aren't all going to wake up one morning and be overcome with this vast feeling of brotherly and sisterly love for one another and everything will be organized and well. I do think more of us share common goals now than in the past so we can come close to organization. It is just a matter of getting our diverse group of professionals to get together and sharing our ideas. Chip's third point is a good one: "3)We need to be asked what we want the organizations to do for us, not be told what our benevolent elders have decided is the best road for us to take." If we aren't all a part of these organizations, then the association leaders can't know what everyone wants or needs.

[Jackie L]

Well...last month I realized that I was NOT a card carrying member of the OAA. Somehow it slipped my mind. I have been active in annual Leadership Conferences, but ooooooops forgot to join in financially as an individual member. So I joined.

What did I receive in return? A prompt response to my membership and recognition as a member of the OAA, a voucher for one free hour of an ABO correspondence cec course, a membership certificate to hang on my wall, assorted discounts and information on Distance Learning and Legislative strategies.

While some of the "perks" will never be used, I do know that a portion of my contribution to the OAA will be used for the infamous annual OAA LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE. This is one benefit most OAA members do not even realize. Monies well spent, in my opinion.

Cheers to Eddege for taking on yet another leadership role in molding the future of Opticianry and well wishes to future state societies and leaders accross the country.

I hope to see you in February.

[Alan W]

Great conversation going here. In my travels I've seen a lot of state society meetings. And, after the meetings I attended with my host we would go for the proverbial cup of coffee at Denny's. (Slightly different type of beverage in Texas!). All too many state societies are being untruthful to themselves about what they set for objectives. They lack people, financial, etc. resources. In itself, they shouold be working on just those deficiencies before becomming viable voices of their memberships. OAA already is aware of its past problems and is actively reversing the negatives. In the grand scheme of things all opticianry, whether it actually IS ONE community or if not CAN ACT LIKE IT IS . . . should be prepared to access each other to accomplish its objectives. When February roles around, I would hope that each state society representative enters the room with a true assesment of his society's current condition, knows what his society needs to do to strengthen its base, and offers itself as a limited resource to OAA. And, likewise, I would hop OAA, after solidifying its assessment and knowing its present available resources, offers them to state level. If in February, just that much is accomplished, its a win/win. There is NO chicken or the egg here. Work needs to be done simultaneously and within a spririt of mutual support, not simply cooperation. I am a transplanted Californian. And, over the last 35 years I have seen that society go up and down like a roller coastr. Not enough true assessment, not enough support to correct it. Typical Californians.... health juice, brussel sprouts and fake bakes! (I graduated John Burroughs High School in Burbank. I have the right to pick on my own kind!)
It would be a shame to see the leadership skills we now have, go it alone again. That sucks. 'Gotta change our ways. Now! Take off the blinders. This is a community. Not just one way . .. every way.
(Ed....I never got an app!)
The IOC simply is not up and running at this time. But, it looks like when the main organizations (State and OAA) are in place and moving in concert, the IOC, if blessed with just that one task of public communications, as expressed so perfectly by Jo, will have plenty on its plate. . . . state, national, fake bakes and all! Run on sentence . . .
S'cuse the plug for JB High School, '62!

[Judy Canty]

Originally posted by cah2020


So let me know when it gets there!

~Cindy

Cindy,
I was with you until this last sentence. No organization will ever have any thing to show anyone without dues paying members. 1700 or so licensed Opticians in VA are allowing slightly over 100 OAV members to shoulder their work. 65,000+ Opticians in the US are allowing less than 10% of their number shoulder their work through OAA and other organizations. The real absurdity is that Opticians believe that OAA can represent our profession for $23.00 a head. That's the dues paid per state association member to OAA. We complain about the "old boy network" controlling our interests, yet that network contributes the major portion of OAA's income. However, if just half of the Opticians in this country paid individual dues, $65.00, OAA would have an income of almost $2 million. If every licensed Optician in VA would join OAV, $95.00, we would have working income of slightly over $161,000. A lot of work can be accomplished with that kind of funding at both state and national levels.
Please don't wait until we get there, without you we never will.
Judy

[Cindy Hamlin]

Judy,
Perhaps you can answer mine and Jo's original questions which led me to make that statement.

What exactly do we (joining members) get for our $65.00? What do we get for the money we pay? Do we get to vote or do others vote for us? Do we get any say into the decisions which are made for us? I have no problem joining, but I want to know what I get for the money I am spending.

We haven't been able to get anyone to answer this question for us.

~Cindy

[Judy Canty]

Cindy, I'll try. In addition to the tangible benefits Jackie mentioned in her post, there is the opportunity to become an advocate for Opticians on a national basis. Do you have an individual vote, not at this time, but that is not to say that it won't happen in the future. If you are an active member of your state association, your designated state association delegates vote your states positions at the Delegate Assembly held at the National Convention. If you are an Honored Fellow or a firm member, then yes you have an individual vote. You cannot be represented, nor can your views and visions be voiced if you're content to protest from the outside at any level.
Now, it's my turn. What do YOU want from our national organization and what is a fair price to ask for it?
Judy

[Alan W]

Please forgive me if I come across as cavalier or I "wax" philosophical (there's a joke in there someplace I'll tell you some day!). I've been in and around opticianry so long I was offered money to show my ABO Certificate it next to the Declaration of Independence! I have seen too much failure. Our Moment of Truth is comming . . . opticianry is faced with competitive and parallel professions that can and will replace us unless we act quickly and with decisivness.

When you pays your nickel you are buying a piece of the rock. It's your ticket to walk in and make a difference. You will not be getting a free set of Ginsu knives, phone card, discount card, or anything else like that. You will be, in your own way, funding the organization and strengthening whatever you invest in. You also get to be heard, and along with your investment, you get active in making change happen. You may have invested in a new chair that you might occupy as the prresident some day. But, your help, voice, and money are needed.

Bye

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by Alan W

When you pays your nickel you are buying a piece of the rock. It's your ticket to walk in and make a difference. You will not be getting a free set of Ginsu knives, phone card, discount card, or anything else like that. You will be, in your own way, funding the organization and strengthening whatever you invest in. You also get to be heard, and along with your investment, you get active in making change happen. You may have invested in a new chair that you might occupy as the prresident some day. But, your help, voice, and money are needed.

Bye

Alan,
In my defense, and maybe I misunderstood your post, I wasn't looking for ginsu knives, phone cards, or discount cards! I was looking to get my voice heard. I have been part of many organizations and boards of directors where I wasn't given a voice. People voted for what they felt without any input from the masses. (Judy, I know you are going to crucify me for this!) I want to be sure (and I will be more than happy to put my money where my mouth is!) that my voice is heard!

I want to be assured that the changes being made involve polling the group for input and direction. I want to know that the people who do vote, do so for me. I don't feel that is too much to ask.

Cindy

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by Judy Canty
Cindy, I'll try. In addition to the tangible benefits Jackie mentioned in her post, there is the opportunity to become an advocate for Opticians on a national basis. Do you have an individual vote, not at this time, but that is not to say that it won't happen in the future. If you are an active member of your state association, your designated state association delegates vote your states positions at the Delegate Assembly held at the National Convention. If you are an Honored Fellow or a firm member, then yes you have an individual vote. You cannot be represented, nor can your views and visions be voiced if you're content to protest from the outside at any level.
Now, it's my turn. What do YOU want from our national organization and what is a fair price to ask for it?
Judy

Judy,
Thanks for the information! I want an organization that gives me a voice! As I posted to Alan, I don't like people making decisions that I have no input over. I want to be assured people are speaking my words and feelings! That would be worth GOLD to me!

~Cindy

[Judy Canty]

Cindy,
Until you're an involved member, you won't have a voice. As a former member of various boards and organizations, I'm sure you understand that often compromises are made for the overall good of the organization and its constituents. Will an organization do exactly your bidding, probably not. But active membership will at least put you in position to make your opinions and desires known.
Judy

[Alan W]

I'll ask you to excuse my sick demented sense of humor. I come from an era (Oh, my God, I'm admitting my age. sorta!) when people had to get what we call "premiums" for spending, joining, etc. So, you've just had a taste of "THE SIXTIES"! No personal issue here.:o

As Judy stated so well, and I borrow from, there is little possibility that any dues will automatically "buy a voice." And, this industry is no exception.
For the last 4 months I have been displaying my voice, losing my temper, speaking out far too much, shooting my foot off just after sticking it in my mouth, and aggravated the arthritis in my fingers to boot. :hammer: I am paying and haven't even invested yet. No complaint . . . I pray that the wonderful changes in OAA and the soon-to-be-birth of IOC, FNAO, and ABO, will streamline the process of putting opticiary back on the map:cry:. You have a cause, I'm sure. I do, too.:mad:

When I go to that Job Coach (A sixties thing, again!) in the sky:rolleyes: , I hope the inscription is NOT . . . He Took Great PD's . . . I just hope I helped lay a new track for opticianry to run on. You speak with conviction . . . that's good. We need it. Thanks
:cheers:
PS....Are you sure you don't want the Ginsu knives? Real sharp, nice handles...cuts paper in mid air....free! (Can't get rid of the damned things!)

[Dannyboy]

Any organization that has the track record of the OAA should feel ashame of being in existance! I have never seen anything pro optician really being sponsored by them. If there are 26K opticians nationwide why is it so many few have decided to join? Let me second guess their opinion. The OAA has done NOTHING for them.

Even their newsletter is BORING.

Opticians dont care about the entering president or the exiting looser, they want to hear what is going on nationally. Opticians want to know about pending legislation at the national or state level. What have they done to put any Pro optician legislation in Washington? Have they impacted the patients bill of rights? Have they ask any of their members to support this or that version of the bill that would be pro optician?

Have they done anything to voice our opinion in the present Low Vision bill? Do they know that there is a low vision bill in DC? Have they tried to put any language in that bill that would be of benefit to us? See none of that has been mentioned. Have they informed the general optician public that the State of Washington was close to getting a refracting bill? Have they tried to make it a national policy among the licensed states to accept reciprocity? Have they informed the public that New Jersey had a bill that would eliminate Optometric dispensing of eyewear? Did they supported that bill or where against it. I could go on and on but the truth is WE DO NOT KNOW how they think. Opticians want the following:
1. Know the state of opticianry in their part of the world.
2. What is the OAA doing at the Federal level?
3. How are they trying to impact any federal legislation?
4. What they are doing to improve the poor state of education that we have. Are they going to require the degree or not?
5. Do they have a lobbyist?
6. Have guts and do something.

Maybe then they can convince more opticians to join and maybe then they can increase their fees. See If I am ok financially, I can give more....much more to OAA membership. I do not miss my card at all....Maybe if they get their act together. I have year after year given my $65.00, could have given more, but they never motivated me. Never knew where my $65.00 went (good dinner to the good old boys?) See what I mean. MISCOMMUNICATION. Ignorance to the max as to what has the OAA done for me? When I finally had the chance to talk to their spokeperson ( a lady called Jackie, I think ) she was fired... Do they have a spokeperson now?



Dannyboy
:eek:
Wicked as ever

[Alan W]

I can't speak for anyone but myself.
But, if what you say is accurate, then . . .
change it!
I have had a problem with opticianry's performance historically. And, to tell you the truth, I have absolutely no desire to get involved in legislative matters. But, I do have a burning desire to enhance opticianry's image as a profession through marketing.
Hence, my big mouth about the IOC.
I'll bet the new OAA could use your input and skills.
Change begins with someone seeing "TOPS" . . .
Threats . . .Opportunities . . .Problems . . . Solutions.
So, what would you recommend next?

[Dannyboy]

You are right but until they decide to do something about the education requirements I have decided not to rejoin. Let me explain, the OAA, the CLSA and NAO have in their power the ability to require the ABO and the NCLC to change their requirements of entry into the profession. It has to be at least a Associates degree. Without a degree this profession will not evolve. Also the way it is currently design leaves only honored and business members a vote. Not very democratic in my view.

Dannyboy:idea: :confused:

If I am wrong please let me know.

[Alan W]

Ya know . . .
I can't argue with anything you're saying.
I've got the degree, too. And, something needs to be done about a whole lot. But, non-participation will yield non-change.
Isn't there some way we can recruit your help?
Tell ya what . . .
I've got a great idea.
If you'll jump in . . . I've got these great Ginsu knives. I'll give them to you for joining, ol buddy ol pal.
What do ya think, huh?


{whisper....} maybe I can get rid of the knives on dannyboy, shh. cah2020 wouldn't take 'em. Don't say anything

[Dannyboy]

Well..lets see what happens is my attitude right now. I will continue to support my state society first... See they had it within their power and they did NOTHING. Probably is time to let them sink. Lets see what the new ship brings.

Dannyboy:rolleyes:

[Alan W]

I'll back off, but . . .
the Ginsu knives are only while supplies last.
Later, Dude

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by Dannyboy
Opticians dont care about the entering president or the exiting looser, they want to hear what is going on nationally. Opticians want to know about pending legislation at the national or state level. What have they done to put any Pro optician legislation in Washington? Have they impacted the patients bill of rights? Have they ask any of their members to support this or that version of the bill that would be pro optician?

Have they done anything to voice our opinion in the present Low Vision bill? Do they know that there is a low vision bill in DC? Have they tried to put any language in that bill that would be of benefit to us? See none of that has been mentioned. Have they informed the general optician public that the State of Washington was close to getting a refracting bill? Have they tried to make it a national policy among the licensed states to accept reciprocity? Have they informed the public that New Jersey had a bill that would eliminate Optometric dispensing of eyewear? Did they supported that bill or where against it. I could go on and on but the truth is WE DO NOT KNOW how they think. Opticians want the following:
1. Know the state of opticianry in their part of the world.
2. What is the OAA doing at the Federal level?
3. How are they trying to impact any federal legislation?
4. What they are doing to improve the poor state of education that we have. Are they going to require the degree or not?
5. Do they have a lobbyist?
6. Have guts and do something.


I think Dannyboy has, in a nutshell, very eloquently stated my thinking as well. I guess my question is, Alan and Judy, if I don't get a voice for my $65 then when will I get a voice. You say to get active and join, but you both admit my voice won't be heard. So then why pay the money? I want to be a champion for change, but I can only do that if I am listened to!

~Cindy

[Alan W]

During the lifescycle an organizations goe through many stages. One of those stages is when it faces erosion due to lack of active leadership. The condition of that leadership is dependent on still another set of circumstances. OAA has been in that state of erosion for some time and its leadership in the process of change. It is in still another state of change where we don't see what goes on internally. I doubt there will be much of announcement saying they are soft right now and seek individuals to strengthen itself. That would probably be bad form. I because I am not internal to it, can't say that's its condition. However, my sense is that it is at the bottom of its curve and about to come back up. OAA looks towards refreshing its relationships with state organizations also, so that makes be believe the timing is best about now to participate in the facilitation of reconstruction. Your membership at this time in its reconstruction is definitely not a customer/servant relationship. I could be wrong. No one has knocked on my door looking for opinion and I don't see why they would. Membership right now is for do-ers.
The folks at OAA already know that some of us want to develop a parallel support organization that would enhance OAA's effectiveness. This round OAA will not have to go it alone. And, so there is a synergy in the making that, while is in its infantile stages, I believe will soon form like a good storm!
You folks are entitled to your opinion and certainly have your right to exercise conservatism. Neither OAA nor IOC nor anyone else I can think of seem to be at the stage where they can announce the kind of "internal customer service" policy that you seek. And, that's OK. Like I said, it looks to me like they are at the bottom of the reconstruction curve or near it enough for it to be at its most receptive stage for input and new blood. Maybe I am wrong, but I doubt it. Certainly, no one should think poorly of you for a wait and see posture.
I believe in my heart of hearts that OAA will emerge stronger, more focused, and far more effective than it has ever been.
What concerns me is that if you have the power to guide people (as I think one or both of you come from management) then it would be still another travesty to miss a beat and then say "I told you so." Perhaps it's also a "lead, follow, or step aside" condition, and you have chosen your path. Since I have no idea whether everything I've said is a bunch of bull . . . time will tell . . .and, at least we know you're there. And, I ask for the forgiveness of OAA people if I speak innacurately. This is one persons opinion and I personally feel OAA forms one of the vital legs of the three legged stool of professional community organization. I'll be darned if I want to see that leg break off.

I just feel badly that neither of you want the Ginsu knives! You really should have seen the commercial!

[Jo]

I agree with you here Alan. The OAA has some internal and external work to do but it is going to be an important part of strengthening opticians' positions in allied health and in legislation.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Alan,
Very eloquent of you! I guess you were talking of me when you said management, huh?????? I guess I need some more information about the OAA.

If anyone is from the OAA (Judy?) on the board, could you post the mission statement or purpose of the OAA? Any more information I could get would help me to make an informed decision on joining.

~Cindy

[Jo]

Cindy,

You can find the Mission Statement under the About the OAA link at their website:

http://www.oaa.org/

There is also other information, such as Bylaws and Resolutions, under that same link.

Perhaps someone can sum them up for us or further define them.

[Judy Canty]

Originally posted by Judy Canty
Cindy,
Until you're an involved member, you won't have a voice. As a former member of various boards and organizations, I'm sure you understand that often compromises are made for the overall good of the organization and its constituents. Will an organization do exactly your bidding, probably not. But active membership will at least put you in position to make your opinions and desires known.
Judy

Cindy,
I didn't say you wouldn't be heard. I said that by not becoming an involved member you wouldn't be heard. That applies not only to our national organizations but also at the state level as well. If you and Dannyboy will be content to complain from outside the ring, then feel free to do so. From that position, you both remain part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by Judy Canty


Cindy,
If you and Dannyboy will be content to complain from outside the ring, then feel free to do so. From that position, you both remain part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.

Judy,
I think you need to reread my posts. I have never complained about the OAA. I have only asked for information in order to make an informed decision. I honestly have no knowledge about the OAA except to know of the letters. I have never been a member and know of no one who was a member. So I have no preconceived notions of the OAA!

Jo,
Thanks for the link! I will check it out.

~Cindy

[rfish777]

One of the problems I for-see, are the State's where there optical Societies are extremely powerful such as New York and Florida. I
don't think they will give up there sovereignty infavor of OAA.

Jo's original statement was: Can the OAA lead Opticianry into the future?

State's like New York and Florida will not give up there rights to let
an organization like the OAA lead them. Why would New York give
in to the OAA, they have nothing to entice the opticians in New York.:cool:

[Judy Canty]

Without trying to be argumentative, what rights do state associations give up when affiliating with OAA or any other organization? If there is strength in numbers, then a 50-state affiliation should build a much stronger association.

[Alan W]

Why would or should state societies lose their strength because of a national affiliation?
They shouldn't. And, I am also convinced that the new OAA doesn't have delusions of grandeur that it can replace the state society. Two different animals. OAA cannot replace a state society . . . if the state society is SERVING its membership properly. And, if it isn't, and needs support . . . OAA should give it. However, if the synergy is true and not a political good ol boys club . .. state societies should be glad to carry the national message and implement programs it agreed to by the affiliation. That's all grreat in theory. Somehow, I get the feeling, that something gets lost in the translation and suddenly this "dog" cant figure out whether it should wag its tail or its tail should wag it!
That to me is a classic example of questionable leadership or no buy in on a shared vision or mission.
Anyone and everyone who gets involved in that sort of "argument" needs to look in the mirror and answer the question: "Who am I and who's tee shirt am I wearing today?"
Is this also not a classic case of not addressing the threats against the professional community in favor of who will address them?

[Judy Canty]

The relationship between OAA and state associations is an affiliation not an abdication. It is, in my mind, a statement of agreement with a published mission statement, goals and course of action. While each state has individual concerns that are best addressed by it's own association, our national organization addresses the larger picture of "Advancing Americas' Opticians." The lack of support from all 50 states only dilutes the effectiveness of any form of national recognition and influence, by signaling an absence of unity within our profession.

[Alan W]

Judy, you can answer in your own words or send me to the statements that answer my question. Whatever is most comfortable. I refer to . . .

The lack of support from all 50 states only dilutes the effectiveness of any form of national recognition and influence, by signaling an absence of unity within our profession

Could you explain the support that OAA has for the state society. Or, perhaps, better said . . . the presence of mutual support declared and anticipated.

[Alan W]

When I used the term mutual, I really meant reciprocal. What I'm looking for is reciprocal signs of action, not necessarily philosophy. Sorry.

[Judy Canty]

Alan,
I'm not going to offer an apologia for the OAA of the recent past. An era has come to a close and I believe we are moving in a very positive direction.
The first most positive step was announcing the Leadership Conference, scheduled for early 2002 in Charleston, SC. The industry professionals involved in its planning and execution are committed to creating a network of state leaders. This network can and will be the cornerstone of what OAA has to offer state associations. They recognize that each state is facing different issues. However, rather than develop a seige mentality, easy to do when your area of concern ends at the state line, they seek to bring these leaders together for mutual support in identifying and solving key issues. The organization has never wavered in its support of post-secondary formal education and licensure requirements for all 50 states. It's ability to lobby in support of these goals has been hampered in recent years by declining membership and the resultant loss of income.

[chip anderson]

I think most opticians criticisms of thier organizations is that they feel they are forced into a "wait and see posture." Why doesn't the OAA ask (not in a prepared poll like the National Democratic Committee pays for where the outcome is fixed) US what we want the organization to do. What outcomes do we want. What do WE think needs to be changed. This might get to the heart of the problem. Is the best Optician someone who was an exec for a large optical manufactureing/sales company? Is the best optician the man with the best bench/dispensing skills? Is he the one with the best knowledge of optical math/mechanics'. Who should be leading us down what road?

We been "waitin' n seein'. And if I read this string right, we ain't been necessisarily movin' uphill.

Votes can come from anyone in the optical business, not just the few in the backroom at the meeting.

Chip

[Dannyboy]

How many times have we heard about a new OAA? How many times have we heard about a synergy between the OAA and the NAO? In any case membership obligation is something that must be answered within each optician. You cannot force any one to join an association that has such a poor record. State societies are the ones that defend the bread at the local level so that is where the membership will be within states that are licensed. It will be ideal that state societies be part of the OAA if it is within the interest of the society, but sometimes that is not the case. Money and common goals are stickers here.

I am somewhat angered at the OAA and the NAO for taking so long to recognize that opticianry does need a standard on the education of an optician. The OAA and NAO could have easily raised the bar many years ago. Opticianry cannot move forward without this. Opticians need an associates degree with uniform training across the board. An associate degree for entry into the profession should be a requirement. Such a change does not need intervention from anyone other than our own. Many of us are good leaders and many of us are good followers that is our choice. In either case, one cannot work without the other. If our state society agrees with the new OAA, I see no problem here. Raise the $ of the dues at the state level and lets be part of the OAA as long as it agrees with our common goals (which has not been the case). It will be interesting to see what membership categories this new OAA will have.

Dannyboy
wicked as ever

:confused:

[Alan W]

Very well said, Dannyboy
Yet I can't help but believe that OAA will step in the right direction.
Before and up to a month ago I visited hundreds of society websites ranging from aerospace to healthcare, building trades to humananities. All strive toward college education as a baseline requirement. I found none that made licensing a requirement without first a degree unless it was a subgroup operating under a master license such as plumbers. In those cases certification on tiered levels ws mandatory. I am hard pressed to see one exception to specialty certification either with or without a license. In the majority of the matured or higher education based groups there was a public relations/career promotion/media organization or committee. Opticianry has none of the above historically, planned or active. That latter function I hope will be the IOC. I have not yet seen one other trade, subprofession, or allied healthcare group that is as splintered off and duplicated as many as 3 times or more as is opticianry, and opticianry is the least trained and advanced in eyecare of the entire group under the description of opticianry. Further . . . (here I go in Readers Digest Condensed Version) Optiboard is now the primitive form and foundation of tomorrows premier optical organization. With a little more technology (Steve has the access) we could have our meetings, get committees started so on and so forth, with all the people we need (NAO/OAA?ABO/NCLE/JAHCPO etc people included). We could make it happen in a year. 2 year degrees will take 2 years. Specialty Certification in 5 months or less, to be repositioned under degreed people in the future, can be done in less than a year, we CAN be the next generation of ophthalmology, optometric, clinical, cosmetic, manufacturing, optical technicians. We should absorb them all and become independent away from the control of medicine and optometry. One problem . . . with all this eye care stuff we do . . . too many are blind to the future.

[rfish777]

You all missed the point. Again why would New York or Florida want to give in to the OAA. They have nothing to offer these states except numbers.

Alan said:
I found none that made licensing a requirement without first a degree unless it was a subgroup operating under a master license such as plumbers.
Alan a few months ago you were arguing that you don't need a license, at that point you and I had some heated debates.

I also take the statement you made illiberal. That statement was:

"opticianry is the least trained and advanced in eyecare of the entire group under the description of opticianry".
I take that as a slap in the face for every optician who has a degree and has been in this business for some time. Who are you to decide that we are least trained? Maybe for you that is true, but for the rest of us at least in New York and Florida we have to keep our continuing education going year in and year out. With statements like these that is why opticianry is going no where. I still can't believe you made that statement, maybe I took it out of context, but it still belie's the point you made that statement.:shiner:

[Judy Canty]

Again I ask, what are states such as Florida and New York giving up or in to?

[Laurie]

Hi Judy,

I could be mistaken, but I think the issue is more about $$ than philosophical differences...

Last I knew, the Florida POF directors couldn't justify sending OAA ($22.00 or $27.00) per POF member to affiliate. Multiplied by approx 900ish POF members, that is a large sum to send out every year. Our exec dir., Mark Miller is also a manager of other professional societies like speech pathologists, and others.

Anyway, he says that he has never heard of a national group (outside opticianry, optometry, ophthalmology) that requires such a high financial obligation to affiliate).


Do societies still have to pay OAA based on their own membership?

If state societies could join in name, the OAA numbers presented in DC could be enormous. Do we necessarily have to charge for this? Then, the OAA directors and members can think of other ways to earn working capital just like the state societies must do.

I do believe, though, that although the OAA is not perfect, we should follow Teddy R's advice from your signature.

I have been a paying member for over ten years, and will continue to do so. I mean, come on...are we up to something like $65.00 per year or something??? This is a low price to pay, if you ask me.

Laurie

[Judy Canty]

Laurie,
Of course it's about money. These kinds of things always are. And yes, it's still $22.00 per member for state association affiliation. The biggest problem right now is that there simply isn't enough individual membership to support the organization, even at the low price of $65.00 a year. In fact, if you were to poll Opticians at large, I think you'd find that they think that's an outrageous sum, especially when coupled with state dues and licensing fees. But the reality is that " dues is dues". POF needs that income to function and so does OAA. The harsh reality is that firm members have traditionally provided the most in dues income for OAA and have, understandably, pressed for and received the lion's share of benefits including voting priviledges. Unfortunately, that base is also shrinking. As Opticians, we need to understand that there is a bigger picture out there beyond our state lines and do what is needed to create and support a strong national organization.

[Laurie]

Hi Judy,

I agree with you completely.

Can you see the point of the states, though?

OAA is in essence saying to states like Florida, 'we want you to support us and affiliate, AND you must pay $19,800.00 per year to do so.

That is too much cash for even a strong state like Florida to build in as a yearly line item.

Are there any discussions going on that you know of to lower that fee?

Laurie

[Alan W]

I am also degreed. I'm from California by way of Brooklyn New York. Don't be insulted...have an egg cream! And, while you're at it have one for me, too. For heaven sakes....stop being insulted...your name never came up in the conversation. I refer to the community of opticians as being undertrained. You can't deny that. Since the there has been no demand for a 2 year degree, all we have is the ABO. And, believe me...when that gate opened, anyone could be certified and I've had my fill of undertrained ABO certified people as an employer. Unfortunately, some of the COT's are better than the ABO's. Further, I didn't say licenses should be discontinued .. . I say people should have a degree to get a license. I also say that unlicensed people should have to secure a certification as a specialty and not just collect a bunch of CEC's. While there are some CEC courses that have some real merit, I can't believe that so many are on the level of basketweaving 101.
My God, Tarot Card Readers get nationally recognized certification on four levels and we just sit there with an ABO that seems to get less and less respect as each year passes. People like you and I hold ABO's and AA's and AS's, and other degrees while corporate optical America plays with ABO likes its a dog bone giving from 0 to $.50/ an hour for passing it. You're insulted? I'm insulted! I just love having my certification on a wall next to somebody who still can't calculate with Prentice Rule or knows why we transpose. Licenses? That, to me is a joke. Because in California people got licenses and were still optical nimrods. Sorry, my friend and esteemed colleague, I'll push for multiple certifications and degrees before I push for licenses. Licenses are receipts for paying state governments. Degrees aren't.
And, NO....I am NOT insulting you. I never insult a fellow New Yorker optician, degreed, licensed, who will have an egg cream for me ....never....got that...never!

[Judy Canty]

Laurie,
Indeed, there are on-going discussions about everything financial, dues, fees, membership levels, etc. And I certainly do understand the states' perspective, I just completed a 2-year term as President of the Opticians Association of Virginia. Our dues are $100 annually, so $22 represents a huge chunk for us also. Somewhere in all this mess is an agreeable solution. OAA can't function without money any more than POF or OAV can. Alternative sources of funding? What, like poorly attended conventions? I'm willing to bet that POF is funded primarily through dues, as is OAV and countless other state associations. That's the nature of the beast, you pay to play. While it would look good to represent 50 states here in DC, somewhere there has to be money to pay the people doing the representing. What did your lobbying effort in FL cost in real dollars, not volunteer hours? It's not cheap at the local level and it's even more expensive at the national level. How much did AOA spend in the TPA campaign? It all boils down to money and Opticians don't believe it should be their money, it should be some other Opticians money.

[Homer]

Hope it's OK if I jump in here too.

For those who say that the major reason for states not affiliating with OAA is philosophical then I would say simply, get in there and fix it! Don't let those "airheads" continue in what you think in a wrong direction for opticianry!

On the money issue, I agree with Judy! It does seem than many (not all!) opticians expct things to happen without spending any of their own money.

My first leadership conference was January 1991. During a plenary session, I heard people asking about OAA doing this and OAA doing that and complaining about some things not being done. As a freshman I got up and said something to this effect: "Oaa is not our mother! It is our child! We can't expect our child to feed us and make things right for us we must nurture the child and make it strong. Only then can this child of ours grow up and become a productive member of society. We also need to get of our ABOC's and get educated instead of expecting mother to hand us a diploma / license!"

A few months ago I suggested that if each member would give up two beers a day (or a speciality coffee), in addition to paying our state dues, we could soon be able to have a rally on the capital steps and pay everyone's ticket to get there. But I guess that would be too much to ask - so I guess we'll keep on sipping our beer and dreaming about tomorrow....... and complaining about the national organization. :cheers:

[chip anderson]

How much does a legistative vote cost in your state? Do you really think you can out bid optometry and the chains?

Chip

[Judy Canty]

There are more of us than them and we should be ashamed for not trying.

Rich, thanks for jumping in, it was getting a little lonely out here.:shiner:

[Laurie]

Hi Judy,

Don't feel alone out here...we're with you!

PS: You are correct about the fact that we have bigger numbers.

During this past legislation here in Florida the OD's and MD's had a HUGE, expensive battle going on...which ultimately died in committee on the last day of session!

At the same time, the opticians, which MUCH less money, defeated the deregulation attempt, AND actually got a bill through!

grass roots does work.

Laurie : )

[Homer]

Don't guess I rightly know what a legislative vote costs in my state - don't rightly care.

Obviously when I said something about storming the capital steps I was talkin' ina metaphor. Now I'll give you another one.

Remember the Hebrew story about David and Goliath? Now this is not an exact quote or translation but my take on the story.

David said, why are you guys afraid of this big guy? Just go out and fight him, you have a promise of help.

So David decides to go and fight the big guy but the establishment said you can't go out there without the proper defensive and offensive accoutrements. David tried them on and said, this does not fit. This ain't me. This is not what I do.

So he went out "naked" with what he did know and do and what he had practiced and won the day.

Buying votes is what the Big Guys do. We gotta have a different way. You are right, we will never win if we try to do battle with their kind of tools.

Something more homey, more natural for us, more "what we do" would be in order - nevertheless it most likely will involve some money; something which opticianry in general has been unwilling to give for any cause.

[Jo]

OK folks before we start traveling down a one-way street let's take a time out here.

I am not currently a member of the OAA. I belong to a state with a large organization wants to be a member of the OAA again but has run into some obstacles along the way. There hasn't been any point in pushing that subject here because of the topic I chose. There is a new administration at the helm of the OAA and it deserves a chance. We will probably hear about what changes are in the works after the Leadership Meeting. Members of the OAA have admitted that the Organization hasn't been at its best the last few years but promises a change. I think it was a good thing to hear them state that here on a public community forum. It is the start of that open exchange some of us are looking for.

I first asked "Can the OAA lead Opticianry into the future?" I now believe they need to. I am looking for constructive comments and suggestions for what we are looking for from the OAA in order for us to want to take a more active role in the OAA and in order for them to serve us best. Hopefully, they will be listening. We need a national organization with members behind it. It is the only way to balance the scales in our profession. The OAA is an established organization involved mostly with legislation but it does support other areas that will help opticians advance in their field. It is our best bet for creating a strong national presence because it is established. The new board of directors has some work to do if it wishes to achieve this type of strength. On the other hand, we cannot sit back and watch the show. We have to support the OAA and play an active roll in what comes next. If we get the membership numbers, we will have a voice. We are the OAA's constituants and must count for something.

If you don't think the OAA is currently capable of leading us into the future then what does it need to do in order to make it happen?

[Dannyboy]

I think the reputation of OAA clouds a new beginning. I would like to believe that changes will be coming. Start by requiring uniform training for opticians by demanding that the ABO requires an associates degree. That is the only change that needs to be made. An organization of poor payed, undertrained will reflect the grandeur of their future achievements. Elevate the requirements now! Get together with the appointing organization of the ABO and require a degree. It is a change they can made without hiring lobbyist or forming commitees. This change will show us followers that our leaders mean business. This type of change will attract membership as grandfathering the current certification will elevate it value.

Dannyboy

;)

[Bev Heishman]

For the OAA to survive and your state associations to survive your membership is crucial. If not we are flogging dead horses. It is time to make a commitment by all. No excuses!

Opticianry has changed dramatically and organizations must change and they know that. And they need volunteerism. A huge metamorphosis is in its stages but it cannot emerge with pessimism. We must see the forrest through the trees. Let us all step outside the box and contribute positively at the state leadership meeting and in suggestions for bylaw changes. To make it happen we must be at the OAA meeting to vote as a state delegate, Honored Fellow or as a firm or guild member. No other way at present.

What business are we all in? Retail! Your responsibility as an owner, tech, optician, assistant, secretary, or doctor is to sell no matter what setting you say you are in. That is how we pay the bills and place food on our tables.

PS. to get through the House alone in this state in 1995-96 the cost was $110,000.

[Jackie L]

Now Homer...To quote you..."Don't guess I rightly know what a legislative vote costs in my state - don't rightly care."

Maine recently attempted to legislate mandatory 2 year education requirements with ABO and licensure and failed. We tried the grass roots approach and most likely failed due to the back room financial discussions held between the ODs and Legislatures during break. Not to pick on you, pal, but I guess we should care.


One of the comforts of stepping into that State Committee room during our public hearing was knowing that the OAA was with us, financially and they even sent the IPP to speak out on behalf of our legislative attempt.

Anybody else out there...don't play a wait and see. Join in. Can you not see the reason to? Strength in numbers.

[Homer]

Jackie, just had a very interesting talk with a speaker who made a presentation to our local Rotary Club.

He is a lobbiest for NFIB (National Federation of Independent Businesses) They are the 5th largest /strogest lobbing group in the US. AARP is first, American Israeli Alliance is second, the AFLCIO is third, the trial-lawyers are 4th. He work exclusively here in Colorado.

As I was sharing with him some ideas, he mentioned the strength of the local Optometric Association which has fought us on licensing attempts. He said, "I was suprised at their strength!"

While money IS involved (the cost of a vote), their strength is much more than that. The local Optometric Association has as it's executive director a former legislator. She insisted that individual optometrists get involved in local campagine committees. She also suggested that they offer themselves for positions on the health-care advisory committees of specific legislators.

The speaker said that in their last legislative action, they had committed votes BEFORE the legislation had actually been written in it's final form.

I think that we often forget that legislators are real people with personal concerns and ethics. We do them a great dis-service to think of them as simply votes that can be bought.

Just as good, professional, successful dispensing (opticianry) is about relationships with our customers, so is good, professional, successful legislation.

So if we need money, I go back to my "beer-can" economics of a few months ago. If we need political power that will come from powerful relationships.

By and large (this is a very general statement) we do not have the opticians with the self-confidence to develope a good relationship with legislators. In years past when many opticianry licenses were established, the business-owner-optician was a golfing buddy of his local legislator and contributed to his campagin. This is where optometry is camped out and that is a power quite hard to oppose.

Does this make any sense, Jackie?

[MVEYES]

I have read a lot of rhetoric on joining and being a member of OAA but still am unclear what this organization is doing to help individual states trying to get licensure or states trying to get formal education laws passed. I realize OAA deals with national issues but what are national issues? Aren't they a culmination of state issues? If our national leadership would set an agenda and focus on individual state assistance we might move mountains with small steps. So far our state organization struggles with budget problems yet it pays $24,000 a year in OAA dues. We don't want to see OAA fall but we need leadership that is sensitive to it's membership.

Jerry Sherman:idea:

[Pete Hanlin]

A couple years ago, I heeded Judy's call to "just join" the OAA. So, I've paid my dues and worn my OAA pin when I work or speak...

I still don't really understand the organization or what it is trying to accomplish, but I at least get the benefit of having my name up on their online database of optical speakers- which has gotten me a few calls.

I personally think the ultimate "report card" on the OAA should be the number of states making progress on licensure. Let's see, when was the last time a new state was added to the "licensed" column? I know this isn't fair, because there are lots of states and blah, blah, blah... I just think on a national level the biggest issue should be gaining licensure for EVERY state. THEN, we can start going back and trying to get national education standards and perhaps refraction legislation (ugh) in some states!

I spoke at the national OAA conference a couple years ago in New Orleans. I suppose Homer is right- if you don't put in the time, you really haven't "earned" a voice. However, I can't honestly say that I saw anyone encouraging anyone to "join in and put in their time." Seems like there are a few people who run and enjoy the organization, and they are quite content with being with theirselves (I did have a pleasant conversation Joyce Otto, however- she was able to give me at least a little background on the OAA).

The OAA is a good idea... I think the organization just needs to communicate with us mere "members" a little better and let us know how we CAN contribute time!

As to state associations and their relationship with the OAA... I know Florida is no longer associated with OAA- why is that?

[Judy Canty]

Pete,
OAA has, as a part of its goals, everything you talked about...50 licensed states, mandatory education at the college level, and an increase in our scope of practice to include refractions. But, it's become at "Catch-22" situation...can't accomplish the goals without money, can't get the money without members, can't get members until we accomplish the goals. ( I have a sneakin' suspicion, that once the goals are acheived, Opticians won't support their national organization because we've accomplished everything they wanted. )
While POF isn't affiliated with OAA, Mark Miller is deeply involved with the Leadership Conference to be held at the end of this month in Charleston, SC. I expect we'll see a new and improved OAA following the Conference. Stay tuned and keep the faith!

[Pete Hanlin]

Judy,
I'm sure anything that Mark is involved with will go well! I didn't mean to be "sniping" with the comment about state licensure... I just think we should take all the legislative money and dump it into one state at a time until we start acheiving licensure in each state!

As you know, we had a little scare here in Florida concerning our licensure status last year. One of the things I noticed on the administration's "reasons to suspend licensure" list was that Opticians are licensed in less than half of the 50 states...

I'll keep the faith and wish you guys the best of luck at the upcoming conference!

[Judy Canty]

I knew you weren't snipping...I just took advantage of the opportunity to talk a little...:cool:

[Jo]

Judy,

Does anyone have an idea why the Connecticut Opticians Association isn't being accepted as a State Society Member? I am just looking to hear the other side of the story on this one. Any comments you would be able to offer would help me understand the actual situation a little better.

[MVEYES]

I was on a list of state leaders and I had information that there was a dues problem or dispute between OAA and the Connecticut association. I heard OAA helped establish another association in Connecticut to replace the old organization. You can get more info on this from Skip Revard.

:confused:

Jerry Sherman

[Judy Canty]

Jo,
I haven't been privy to all sides of the story about the dues issue, so I'm hesitant to say much.
My suggestion would be that you come to Charleston as one of the representatives from CT. You're just the kind of enthusiastic member we need!

[CTOpt]

Dear Optiboard Professionals,

We originally posted this reponse in reply to a statement made by ts on a different thread General Discussion Form/Are You A Joiner? (http://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3627) The "quote" appears in that thread.

Reviewing this discussion, we feel it is appropriate to repeat it here.

Respectfully,
The Connecticut Opticians Association (http://www.CTOpticians.com)

Whats Going On in CT?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the national org did not refuse to accept COA as a state member the COA chose not to join the national org. They were offered membership and had many conversations concerning membership long before the other org in CT paid dues. we are talking about the national meeting in ca. as the last attempt to get coa to join and they chose not to join at that time. I do not Know what is going on in Ct but it is time to put the ego's away and get back to one org. no one gains when there is more than onr association
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Board of Directors of the Connecticut Opticians Association, Inc. (COA) has been monitoring the Optiboard threads regarding our Association and the OAA with great interest. Our Association has declined comment until this recent post. Continued unsubstantiated comments originating from hearsay will only create additional rumors, apathy and animosity among professional opticians. Our profession cannot tolerate additional splintering of its leadership.

We now recognize our responsibility to respond accordingly

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . the COA chose not to join the national org. They were offered membership and had many conversations concerning membership long before the other org in CT paid dues.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Founded and incorporated in 1934, the Connecticut Opticians Association, Inc. was a charter member of the OAA. The COA DID NOT refuse to pay its OAA dues. Current with a previous arrearage, we continued to make monthly payments against an expected dues billing. For a period of 10 months, we paid a monthly assessment, without benefit of a dues statement. We stopped payment only when a former OAA staff member questioned where to apply our monthly checks. (She had no invoice to apply our payments against) Repeated requests for an accounting of monies already paid to the OAA went unanswered for more than year. Any responsible business would NOT pay fees 1) without proper invoicing and 2) when accountability questions went unanswered.

When a simple accounting was finally rendered, we disputed the application and amount of our payments. A request for explanation still remains unanswered. It appears that we paid more than was accounted by OAA. We now consider that a moot issue and are no longer concerned with it. Too much time has passed.

We have several unanswered letters and emails to the OAA stating our belief in its mission and objectives. Before we would pay a significant amount of money to reaffiliate, we asked for an indication that the OAA would have the financial stability and sufficient staff to fulfill its mission.

During this period, the only correspondence ever received from the OAA was a letter to disassociate us for non-payment of dues.

While we were still attempting to communicate with the OAA, it voted in May 2001, to recognize a newly organized splinter group in CT as its State affililiated member. That group of 6 – 7 independent owners had no By-laws, officers or members. The organization was a private club of owners that is not incorporated in the State of Connecticut.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . we are talking about the national meeting in ca. as the last attempt to get coa to join and they chose not to join at that time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The COA Board of Directors sent its Executive Director to the OAA meeting in Anaheim. He had a blank check authorizing payment of dues, providing the COA be singularly recognized. Personality conflicts prevented that from happening. He was informed by an Executive officer of the OAA, as witnessed by several people, that the COA was not wanted by the OAA.

We asked for a mutually agreed upon, authorized mediator to resolve those conflicts, investigate the OAA By-laws and provide answers of accountability. The requested mediator was never provided.

Through email, personal and conference telephone calls, the Connecticut Opticians Association, continued to seek and received informal advice from an OAA Vice-president. Recognizing the cash flow problems of the OAA, we understood that our dues payment, representing more than 200 CT opticians, would be beneficial to the planned restructuring of the OAA.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . They were offered membership and had many conversations concerning membership long before the other org in CT paid dues
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although accepted as an affiliate in May, as of late October, the splinter group had not paid any dues to the OAA. Perhaps its dues assessment was unclear, as it had no recognized membership. Acting on the advice of the OAA Vice-president, the COA sent an Express letter and a check for affiliation addressed to OAA Acting Executive Manger, Mike Robey. Our advice indicated that sending a dues payment would force the OAA Board to vote on whether to accept or decline COA State member affiliation. It would finally resolve the situation one-way or the other. The Express Mail was returned to our office unopened and marked REFUSED. By telephone, Mr. Robey acknowledged that the letter was never delivered to him. The OAA VP informed us that an Executive officer of the OAA instructed the OAA office staff to return that letter.

The OAA VP told us that the splinter group in CT finally made dues payment just days before our Express mail was received and refused.

The Connecticut Opticians Association represents by its membership, opticians in all aspects of our profession, not just independent owners. Our motto, No matter who you are, or where you work, we represent you is meant to include opticians who work in a corporate environment, for optometry or with ophthalmology.

As the OAA claims to be looking to restructuring in the immediate future, it will be imperative to decide if they will represent the interests of all optical personnel or to represent just a select few.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . I do not Know what is going on in Ct but it is time to put the ego's away and get back to one org. no one gains when there is more than onr association
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We agree with this statement. If you cannot document facts pertaining to the COA, you should refrain from making unsubstantiated comments. It has been the position of the COA that only ONE State association be recognized by the OAA as a state-affiliated association. While a splinter group of some 50 members is recognized in Connecticut, the COA will be hard pressed to provide any financial support to the OAA.

In the meantime, the rumors concerning the Connecticut Opticians Association refusal to join the OAA must stop! We are a viable, well managed organization that recognizes its fiduciary responsibility to its membership.

With sincerity,
Jannie B. Shapiro, M.Ed, LO
1st Vice-president
Connecticut Opticians Association
www.CTOpticians.com (http://www.CTOpticians.com)

[MVEYES]

There is a lot of good information coming to this forum. Don't let it stop.

:cool: Jerry

[Sam Johnson]

This is my first time to even look at the Optiboard. It is interesting to me that this subject is being discussed here and it has also been discussed here in Texas for the last two or three years.

I too believe that a strong national organization, that is willing to fight at a national level for our needs as Opticians, would be a good thing. I have been told that there have been opportunities to support state level legislative efforts to expand the scope of practice of Opticians. That these legislative efforts were passed over by the leadership of the OAA because the legislation did not fit the view of the leadership at that time. True or not, even the perception of a self serving leadership, creates serious problems for all Opticians. Unfortunately, our diversity as opticians has always been a serious problem. The needs of a mandatory licensed state Optician is very different from states that have voluntary licenses such as Texas, and the Opticians serving the public in states where opticians do not have any legal status at all.

The "good old boy" current system at the OAA is real. From the "in group" point of view, it is the only way that they can protect themselves from radical changes that might negatively effect their licensed states. Unfortunately, the world is changing faster than anyone ever thought would be possible. Even the licensed states are facing problems in proving that the public is better served by licenced opticians vs. non-licenced opticians. This means that the tight grip on the OAA that is currently held by the current leadership probably needs to be loosened. Our current leaders will find this very difficult to do. They have worked very hard to keep the OAA in existance and deserve many praises for their efforts during the last few years. The heavy debt that was created by the obvious lack fiscal responsibility in the past has been resolved.

I will continue to keep my firm membership active even though the executive board of my professional association in Texas has decided not to renew our affiliate membership during this current year. This does not mean that we will not support the OAA financially in the future. Just not at this time.

When the concerns of Opticians in non-mandatory licensed states are herd and addressed appropriately, I feel that our Texas association will be ready to participate again. Until then, I plan to participate on a firm basis.

We have developed many great programs and we will continue to concentrate on implementing our five year plan of action.

Proud to be a Registered Optician in Texas!

[Judy Canty]

Sam, that's a crying shame. I know that OAA worked diligently for several years to bring Texas back into the fold. But having just returned from a very disappointing spring convention in Virginia, I can understand your frustration. When an organization loses touch with its constituency, it's future is cloudy at best. I will renew my OAA membership this week and I will continue to support my state association, if for no other reason than to retain the ability to remind our leaders that associations are responsible to their members.

[Sam Johnson]

Hi Judy,

Thank you for your comments. As an officer with our state asociation, I am most interested in serving our association members. We have a very busy schedule of activities each year that include trying to pass opticianry bills in the Texas legislature, community service projects, 100 hour refraction training courses, "Registered Optician" promotion program, and our annual meeting/educational seminar. We have a very full plate. I guess our Executive Board felt we had enough going on at this time. Our membership has nearly doubled every year because we keep making progress in the above areas. I hope this trend continues.

[chip anderson]

Why does anyone think thier future is tied to some organisation, or legislation? Make your own future.

Sam Johnson: Are you perchance related to the late Samuel B. Johnson, M.D. from West Texas and formerly the head of The University of Mississippi Ophthalmology Dept?

[Sam Johnson]

Hi Chip,

You are correct. We should all make our own future.

Unfortunately, as an Optician, the playing field and rules are weighted against us because the other "O's" did organize and pass legislation that provided a better future for all of their fellow professionals. Anyone who thinks that politics is to distasteful or a waist of time and energy or that they do not want to participate in the legislative process is in effect letting someone else control their future through legislation.

If you really believe that Opticians should make their own future, than get involved where the action is through your state society organization's legislative action committee. If they are not active enough for you, than help them fight the good fight. As long as the other "Os" believe that we will not fight for our own future, they will never respect us or our profession.

Oh, I am not related to the Ophthalmologist that you mentioned.

[GOS_Queen]

Sam -



I am quite impressed with what Texas is in the process of doing and what it already has done. :cheers:

That's just awesome~I wish all the states (I guess I mean MY STATE :o especially) had the enthusiasm, organization and drive that Texas does. :idea:

Welcome to Optiboard :nerd:

[Sam Johnson]

Thank you.

We have a very broad activity base that keeps us busy at building a better future for opticians that consider themselves professional enough to continuously improve their skills in Ophthalmic Optics.

Too often, the only goal of opticians is to be a better sales person. The result is most opticians are considered to be glorified sales people that can not make professional judgement calls with out a doctor to help them. At this time there is no big financial gain in learning skills that truely make an optician an equal partner of the other two "Os". That comes when opticians truely are the experts in Ophthalmic Optics. The other "Os" have left the Art and Science of Opticianry for other areas of expertise. There is a void and we need to fill it.

I call for professional opticians everywhere to raise the standards of what is considered acceptable continuing education and start teaching optics and the skills that better serve the public when ever possible. I know that it is easier and less expensive to let the manufacturers provide CECs, but it is usually not in the best interest of our profession to continuously learn from entry level courses. ABO/NCLE has three levels of course approval. Level two and three are considered the more advanced training and I believe that they are more interesting also.

Does any one else agree or disagree?

Sam Johnson, ABOM, NCLE-AC
Texas Department of Health - Registered Optician
www.ROATx.org (http://www.roatx.org/) (your invited to check out our web site)

[wmcdonald]

It is imperative that Opticians advance educationally. Your efforts are very much appreciated and I wish you the best in your efforts. I will be in your state in June and look forward to seeing first hand what you and your colleagues are doing there.

Best regards,
Warren