Toughest Licensure Requirements

[Judy Canty]

I'll play too. The SAO website doesn't look like it's been officially updated since it's copyright in 2011. The last forum post was in September 2012. While I respect the effort, the organization which began with such fanfare appears to be as quiet as the existing organizations that have been pilloried for their lack of both communication and effecting substantive change.
While I have all the respect in the world for your accomplishments, Wes, sniping at me isn't going to do anything to improve the lot of opticians anywhere. I've paid my dues, with both time and money, by serving my profession through involvement with the OAA, OAV,COA and as adjunct faculty in the short-lived Opticianry program at Northern Virginia Community College. I don't need anointing. I've earned my place in the discussion, and I'll ask you to be, at the very least, civil.

[idispense]

Summary update as is properly pointed out by WES (or if it was FEZZ it would be "pinted out" :

Can someone expand this summary in as few words and as concise as possible so that we can work from an agreed upon synopsis:

(1) Opticians are not being paid to advance their knowledge and are not likely to be rewarded financially
(2) Employers want sales, not necessarily education or licenses
(3) There is no unified organization with adequate leadership
(4) There is no unified definition of what an optician is or how one should be educated to become an optician
(5) Most of us are fed up with the current state of affairs
(6) Many are of the opinion that there is no accountability, or transparency only apathy at many levels
(7) Volunteers are dedicated, hardworking, individuals, they have a life, children,wife and expenses so they need to be paid & treated with respect

[Wes]

I'll play too. The SAO website doesn't look like it's been officially updated since it's copyright in 2011. The last forum post was in September 2012. While I respect the effort, the organization which began with such fanfare appears to be as quiet as the existing organizations that have been pilloried for their lack of both communication and effecting substantive change.
While I have all the respect in the world for your accomplishments, Wes, sniping at me isn't going to do anything to improve the lot of opticians anywhere. I've paid my dues, with both time and money, by serving my profession through involvement with the OAA, OAV,COA and as adjunct faculty in the short-lived Opticianry program at Northern Virginia Community College. I don't need anointing. I've earned my place in the discussion, and I'll ask you to be, at the very least, civil.

The site was partially updated last month, and as you do not have access to anything other than the general forum, you have no way of knowing when the last member forum post was. To add to that: we are working on setting up an entirely new, more manageable site.

FWIW, I was very civil to you for the longest time, even looking out for you and backing you up here on several occasions. At some point, it became apparent that our politics do not mesh, and we have had a rather troubled relationship since.

When you say snarky things like "BTW, any more info from the committee of "movers and shakers" in Opticianry? Sorry, I've forgotten the official name" and disingenuous things like "I honestly could not remember the name until the initials were given" when we have it in our signature lines, you appear very unbelievable and combative.

When you engage in posting outdated information while cherry picking the opposing views' information and ignoring legitimate data, as seen in this thread: http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...545#post447545,you seem like one who has an agenda, and cares little for facts.

Considering your behavior toward the SAO in general, and me in particular, I'd say I've been extremely civil. I only go "sniping" (in your words) at people who fire at me or mine first. This is just more "Crabs in a Bucket" and you've been actively engaging in the practice. Personally, I'd rather have you as an ally than an enemy, but I can deal with either. I'll play nice if you will.

[Johns]

Summary update as is properly pointed out by WES (or if it was FEZZ it would be "pinted out" :

Can someone expand this summary in as few words and as concise as possible so that we can work from an agreed upon synopsis:

(1) Opticians are not being paid to advance their knowledge and are not likely to be rewarded financially
1. They WILL be, and in many cases, they already are.

(2) Employers want sales, not necessarily education or licenses
2. Employers DESERVE sales, and sales are not left behind with education.
(3) There is no unified organization with adequate leadership
3. Unity? If you start from the bottom up, the unity will be there. I don't think it's possible to unify the older organizations. Many of them are threatened by the prospect of education.
(4) There is no unified definition of what an optician is or how one should be educated to become an optician
4. There will be. That is a huge part of the process.
(5) Most of us are fed up with the current state of affairs
5. People have been fed up for a long time. Many of us "fed up" people have been putting countless hours of our own time into making a change. We are doing this all out of our own personal funds...no sales rep travel expenses, no association leadership funds. We are paying for this out of the same check books that we pay our home mortgages, groceries, and our kids' school supplies from. Many are using vacation days that we'd rather spend with our families. Why? Because we might just be more fed up than everybody else...or at least we're fed up enough to try something different.
(6) Many are of the opinion that there is no accountability, or transparency only apathy at many levels
6. That is more than an opinion; in many cases, it's the truth.
(7) Volunteers are dedicated, hardworking, individuals, they have a life, children,wife and expenses so they need to be paid & treated with respect
7. We are not doing this for respect, and we knew going into this that we would get little or none. Threads such as this are a testimony to that. However, we welcome threads like this, as it is a great forum for discussion, and only puts a brighter spotlight on the very issues we are working on.

...

[Judy Canty]

Just to be clear, I self-funded my expenses for my work with OAA, OAV and COA. That commitment required that I close my business when necessary to meet my obligations. Obligations that I made because I believed in what we were trying to accomplish.

My employer covers expenses related to trade shows, including 2 un-Expos which were of little value on a strictly business level, however illuminating the conversations.

In so far as the SAO website is concerned, improvements made in the dark are still invisible. Our industry is not improved by exclusion.

[idispense]

Score: One for Judy . . One for Wes

Accomplishments=0

We need a tie breaker..... Anyone want to redirect this anger to themselves ?

[Wes]

Just to be clear, I self-funded my expenses for my work with OAA, OAV and COA. That commitment required that I close my business when necessary to meet my obligations. Obligations that I made because I believed in what we were trying to accomplish.
I both appreciate the commitment and commend your efforts.

My employer covers expenses related to trade shows, including 2 un-Expos which were of little value on a strictly business level, however illuminating the conversations.
That was nice of them. I hope you enjoyed the semi-vacation. Myrtle Beach is a nice destination. :)

In so far as the SAO website is concerned, improvements made in the dark are still invisible. Our industry is not improved by exclusion.
To be fair, the improvements are being made in the light, and a new website is coming, as I pointed out. Also, the Membership forums are not "in the dark", they are for dues-paying members. I believe Optiboard has just such a feature?

...

[Judy Canty]

So did you finally remember the name, or were you snarking about some other group of Opticians?

I didn't start this nonsense, but I will finish my part now. Had you been active during the early 2000's, you would understand the commitment that a relatively small group of "true believers" made to stop the OAA, the sponsor of the SAO, from ceasing to exist at all. I sacrificed my time, money and ultimately my business to that commitment. Your arrogance cannot and will not diminish the pride I have in the work we accomplished.

Peace out.

[Judy Canty]

...

Perhaps it was a vacation for you. It was not for me. In fact, I attended the first un-Expo 2 weeks after a total knee replacement. No vacation there, just a belief in a dream.

[Wes]

I didn't start this nonsense http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...l=1#post449284 , but I will finish my part now. Had you been active during the early 2000's, you would understand the commitment that a relatively small group of "true believers" made to stop the OAA, the sponsor of the SAO, from ceasing to exist at all. I sacrificed my time, money and ultimately my business to that commitment. Your arrogance cannot and will not diminish the pride I have in the work we accomplished.

Peace out.

http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...l=1#post449284
I was Active Duty Army in the first half of the 2000s, and I didn't have the liberty to engage in personal and professional crusades. A veteran is someone who has signed "a check for up to, and including, his life." I know what commitment is.
Aside from a small amount of logistical support, I am unaware of any major support or funds received from OAA to SAO. We are funded by significant monetary contributions from the founding members and sponsored by Transitions, Younger, Shamir, and Essilor, as indicated on the website. We would exist with or without the OAA.

[Wes]

Perhaps it was a vacation for you. It was not for me. In fact, I attended the first un-Expo 2 weeks after a total knee replacement. No vacation there, just a belief in a dream.

Well, whatever the case, it was a vacation day for me. I went on my day, and on my dime, just to meet some like minded people. I'm still glad I did.

[Judy Canty]

I didn't start this nonsense, but I will finish my part now. Had you been active during the early 2000's, you would understand the commitment that a relatively small group of "true believers" made to stop the OAA, the sponsor of the SAO, from ceasing to exist at all. I sacrificed my time, money and ultimately my business to that commitment. Your arrogance cannot and will not diminish the pride I have in the work we accomplished.

Peace out.

Destroy? Really?

[Wes]

Destroy? Really?

I stand corrected, I misread that. Apologies. We really need to end this. FWIW, I support the concept of the OAA, and when or if they begin to push opticianry in a direction I believe to be beneficial to opticians, I will support them financially with dues.

[idispense]

summary update :

Can someone expand this summary in as few words and as concise as possible so that we can work from an agreed upon synopsis:

(1) Opticians are not being paid to advance their knowledge and are not likely to be rewarded financially
(2) Employers deserve sales, and do not necessarily see the link between education, licenses, and sales
(3) There is no unified organization with adequate leadership
(4) There is no unified definition of what an optician is or how one should be educated to become an optician
(5) Most of us are fed up with the current state of affairs, some are trying to change it but apathy anad distrust prevail.
(6) There is no accountability, or transparency in regulators which fosters apathy at many levels.
(7) Volunteers are dedicated, hardworking, individuals, they have a life, children,wife and expenses so they need to be paid & treated with respect
(8) Unification is hampered by division, anger and desire to batter each other over the head and duke it out like children

[wmcdonald]

I stand corrected, I misread that. Apologies. We really need to end this. FWIW, I support the concept of the OAA, and when or if they begin to push opticianry in a direction I believe to be beneficial to opticians, I will support them financially with dues.

Wes,
What you must understand is that current OAA folks, while largely undercated and less-than-optimal leaders have not been the problem. For the last decade or so, at least there has been a rocognition of the need for change. I am a life-long member of OAA, NAO CLSA and others. They do some good things. But it is clear OAA changes from year-to-year at the whim of the new president.

Now, regarding SAO.......it is not a membership group. It is designed only to recognize those with advanced credentials. That is all. It is apolitical and meant to provide some path upwards. If it is accepted by those in the field and seen as legitimate, the so be it.

idispsnse is asking valid questions. I have answered them all at some point. Other comments?

[Uilleann]

To directly address this SAO group - simply put, it is just another group that speaks only for themselves - and not for American opticianry as a whole. It is seen by many fellow dispensers as divisive, non-inclusive of the current average dispenser in America, and only further fracturing any hope of coming together on a cohesive, national scale - and this is a critical point if we plan to move EVERYONE forward and upward. Now, enough of all that.

Yes Johns, I am aware that a guild used to exist...it seems it lingers more in name only today, but without any major guiding purpose perhaps? By definition, a guild was historically an "association of persons of the same trade or pursuits, formed to protect mutual interests and maintain standards." Sounds simple enough. It also happens to sound just like what the ABO should be doing - but isn't, state licensure should be doing - but isn't, and all the numerous groups, associations, societies, academys, boards, commissions, foundations should be doing - but aren't. I don't see how any group that continues to exclude the vast majority of opticians today for any reason, can have a prayer of either survival or even relevance. The public at large certainly doesn't seem to care...

So how to unite EVERYONE around the cause of the painful and tortuously slow process of moving EVERYONE slowly to a better place? That is the question...and state by state licensure ain't that ticket it seems. Do any agree?

[wmcdonald]

I understand your position on SAO, and I can tell you that was not the point we were trying to make at all. We wanted to help give folks something to stive for, and I am sorry you felt it was divisive. But we went through this issue before, and I won't belabor the point.

I look forward to continuing this discussion.

[Judy Canty]

To directly address this SAO group - simply put, it is just another group that speaks only for themselves - and not for American opticianry as a whole. It is seen by many fellow dispensers as divisive, non-inclusive of the current average dispenser in America, and only further fracturing any hope of coming together on a cohesive, national scale - and this is a critical point if we plan to move EVERYONE forward and upward. Now, enough of all that.

Yes Johns, I am aware that a guild used to exist...it seems it lingers more in name only today, but without any major guiding purpose perhaps? By definition, a guild was historically an "association of persons of the same trade or pursuits, formed to protect mutual interests and maintain standards." Sounds simple enough. It also happens to sound just like what the ABO should be doing - but isn't, state licensure should be doing - but isn't, and all the numerous groups, associations, societies, academys, boards, commissions, foundations should be doing - but aren't. I don't see how any group that continues to exclude the vast majority of opticians today for any reason, can have a prayer of either survival or even relevance. The public at large certainly doesn't seem to care...

So how to unite EVERYONE around the cause of the painful and tortuously slow process of moving EVERYONE slowly to a better place? That is the question...and state by state licensure ain't that ticket it seems. Do any agree?

Oddly enough, I agree. The Guild does still exist and continues to be available only to OAA Firm Members. Like Realtors, as described in a previous post, they have agreed to abide by an additional set of standards, though that seems to have gone by the wayside. Perhaps the OAA should be lobbied to open the Guild to any member who agrees to a higher set of educational and ethical standards, rather than further splintering an already unstable platform.

I, rather my business, was a member of the Washington (DC) Guild, but left when I found that they were admitting members who were not only not OAA Firm Members but were actively involved in the business of providing refractions. Curent Guild information, including members, is available on the OAA website.

[Uilleann]

Oddly enough, I agree. The Guild does still exist and continues to be available only to OAA Firm Members. Like Realtors, as described in a previous post, they have agreed to abide by an additional set of standards, though that seems to have gone by the wayside. Perhaps the OAA should be lobbied to open the Guild to any member who agrees to a higher set of educational and ethical standards, rather than further splintering an already unstable platform.

I, rather my business, was a member of the Washington (DC) Guild, but left when I found that they were admitting members who were not only not OAA Firm Members but were actively involved in the business of providing refractions. Curent Guild information, including members, is available on the OAA website.

Then Judy, what about the prospect of organizing a national opticians guild? Open to ANYONE who seeks to better themselves and the brand of "Optician™" as our trade/profession moves forward - with a goal of including EVERYONE, right NOW, TODAY. A mission statement and organizational goal could be laid out very simply to improve our profession over time, increase the value of the brand, increase knowledge, skill and educational backgrounds. But if it doesn't include everyone, all at once, at the inception, you will never get the mass buy-in needed I fear.

A viable movement must let ALL opticians know they're of value, and most importantly of all, let the PUBLIC know the value of quality opticians. The bar can and I think we all agree should be raised from it's current level. But this can't be a move that alienates 99% of dispensers. The move towards positive change and progress should be started as strongly, simply and smoothly as possible - and in as open and transparent a manner as can be accomplished. With everyone on board, aware of what is going on, it's crazy enough to work...just possibly!

[tx11]

I noticed that Darryl Meister is in the process of developing an ABO review that appears will be made available at NO CHARGE here on OB to any one who will take the time and initiative to study it and then test. When it is complete we should all get cheap OB business cards made up and hand them out to all dispensers we encounter who are not ABO already (walmart,visionworks,Lux and private practice and trade shows). ASK our frame reps and lab reps to actively hand them out also. Sort of a grass roots movement to make the "standard" standard. It could take place all across America simultaneously! I must be crazy!!!

[Judy Canty]

Rather than try to create yet another organization from whole cloth, I believe that we petition the OAA to redefine Guild Membership. Move it away from the Firm Membership requirement because, like it or not, the number of truly independent practices, those without a refractionist, is shrinking. I am certain that any organization that tries to infringe on what current Guild members see as an entitlement will be met with steep and expensive resistance. However, our strength should be in a clear definition of what this new version of the Guild should be and who it represents. We need to bring large numbers of warm bodies who are not only willing to join OAA as an individual member but also to accept an additional level of membership with a Guild designation. Remember, Guilds were the forerunners of unions, made up of individuals who progressed through education and skill levels to become masters of their art.

I'm game, but I can't and won't do it alone.

[MakeOptics]

So how to unite EVERYONE around the cause of the painful and tortuously slow process of moving EVERYONE slowly to a better place? That is the question...and state by state licensure ain't that ticket it seems. Do any agree?

Dude that's the problem, why unite everyone, let the slow be slow, we need to find a way of moving those that drive slow out of the fast lane. Contrary to popular belief no one here is just smart and born with knowledge, some seek it and work hard to attain it, create a separate class for them and divide this defunct profession into two separate factions. This is where optometry got it's birth, so arguing it won't work is just not true from a historical perspective.

[Barry Santini]

Yeah, Judy....Massers. That's me.

[Judy Canty]

Yeah, Judy....Massers. That's me.

??

[Uilleann]

Dude that's the problem, why unite everyone, let the slow be slow, we need to find a way of moving those that drive slow out of the fast lane. Contrary to popular belief no one here is just smart and born with knowledge, some seek it and work hard to attain it, create a separate class for them and divide this defunct profession into two separate factions. This is where optometry got it's birth, so arguing it won't work is just not true from a historical perspective.

I respectfully disagree. The last thing the public needs or wants to be presented with is 16 "levels" of what denotes an optician. The concept of licensure in a broad and general sense, is to establish a baseline and (one hopes) very similar standard of practice of a given profession or trade. Obviously, even amongst the licensed states, opticianry is all over the map, with many barely requiring a pulse, as the saying is thrown around here all day long, and others requiring much more stringent entry prerequisites be met. There is NO STANDARD currently. The internet guys are having a field day with it as well. The ABO isn't going to get us there, and neither are any of the current optically minded groups as they exist.

Find a means and a way to get everyone in opticianry to unite, and stop trashing the "little guy". Give them a hand up. Make them WANT to better their skill, their craft, their profession, their education. Don't defecate on them because they - for whatever reason - aren't as elevated as we, in our esteemed opinions, think they should be right now. Figure that out, and you'll gain momentum. Continue to splinter off, and do nothing but foster jr high level cliques, and we're dead - exactly where we deserve to be.

The optometry argument is tired. If we wanted to practice as OD's, we each and every one could pursue that. Personally, that's not my bag baby. I enjoy what I do as it stands now. I expect the majority of us do actually. We just need to do it together, and in a unified fashion.