It's not just opticianry. Ohio is trying to change the laws that regulate cosmetology, and large grocery chains (Giant Eagle, WalMart) are pushing to allow centralized filling of mdical prescriptions. Imagine having invested upwards of $160,000 in an education to become a pharmacist, only to find that thousands of your colleagues (and yourself) will be replaced by one person, 5,000 miles away?
Ophthalmic Optician, Society to Advance Opticianry
Uggghhh. No offense but you sound just like the rest of the Opti-saurus-rex's that I've grown up with in this field. Licensing/Registration is not meaningless. Just as education in your chosen field is not meaningless. If anything I have to believe that my generation has enough oomph to stand up and make some noise in this field, especially after being in a family of independant Opticians and watching what they do to survive. I just hope we can manage to do so before the big boxstores and insurances squish us.
Pez:D
Just as in politics there are some purists out there who want to go back to the bad old cowboy days when the primary source of regulation was at the end of a rope and everyone packed a pistol. No thanks. Not in national politics and not in the professions. We need some protection from the would be cowboys out there. Sure, the regulators need to be controlled and need reasons for their regulations, but that's what democracy is all about, and it works pretty well most of the time.
Yes! And by partnering with OMDs or ODs who just want to be doctors. Who do you think runs those online opticals, anyway? They are owned by corporations, but there has to be an optician in there somewhere. There is opportunity all around, we just have to be willing to reach for it.
Remindes of of several years back when the state of Florida was looking to put our licensing on the chopping block.
Well thanks to it being mandatory that we have a Opticians License, a Apprentice License, and/or Board Certification License. And have ABO and NCLE license or what ever they call themselves now. We get to keep our license.
Yes, at one time our license renewal fee was OUTRAGEOUS. It was pushing 5, 6, 7, HUNDRED I don't recall. It is now more in line. $250 every two years. BUT on the upside of all that regulation and money we put out we were able to show the state of Florida how much money was being generated for them, several million. And then the state stepped back and asked themselves.........and just why are we wanting to deregulate this revenue generating body of government?
Needless to say, we kept our license without a lot of effort.
In my experience, when most Opticians discuss independents, we are referring to those in dispensaries, not labs. But you point to the real problem. Anybody can be called an Optician! Until you have to have something beyond a pulse to enter this field it will never improve. A real shame.
My family has ran independant Optical stores for 36 years now. We have three retail locations staffed with ABOC/NCLE certified and RSLD licensed individuals. Where we live we are one of two independant Opticals left. Since all of the Opthalmologists and Optometrists have dispensaries now it has become increasingly harder for us to fill outside rx's. The doctors generally don't give the patients their rx until they have walked them into their own dispensaries first. The positive thing about us is that we know what we are doing and do it well and the community knows it, so we do still get a good stream of business.
Pez:D
Perhaps one should differentiate between "independent" and "ethical" as was the case back on the good old days of the original Guild.
In order to be a Guild Optician you could not have any pecuniary connection with an ophthalmologist or optometrist. The Guild Optician could not have a carpetbagger OD refractionist come in as an "independent doctor of optometry" a few hours a week as is the case today nor could an ophthalmologist open up a sales room in some unused space in his office.
The Guild Optician stood on his own two feet.
A big, big +1 rbaker
There are many things in life that catch your eye... but very few things will catch your heart.... Pursue those!
Well, we take it in the shorts just like every other independant Optician filling outside rx's. What helps us is to have a good relationship with our labs and making sure they have a decent redo policy (most do). Also, we have limitations for the patient on when we will do a redo at no charge. We give them 60 days. if they come back after 60 days with a redo we charge them a service fee. This falls in line with what some of our labs policies are.
I have always found doctor redos strange. For instance, if I took my prescription to a pharmacy to have it filled and pay for it and the pills didn't work for me, I go back to my doctor who writes me a NEW rx, not a REDO. He doesn't write REDO on the rx. And I certainly don't expect to not pay for the NEW/redone rx. Could you imagine? Here's a redo rx for those pills, I don't have to pay right? Sorry, end rant. ;)
Pez:D
No, I appreciate your response. I think the idea started when the first Varilux was introduced about the time I came into practice in the 70s. The lens was a horribly hard design and was not wearable by most people so the labs offered a redo to entice people, with some of the risk taken out. I don't know for sure, but I think Essilor was part of the scheme. Pharmaceutical Rxs are different because the prescriber rarely if ever has any financial interest in the pills themselves, plus they are accustomed to charging for every visit, not having anything like "followups are included" or "free".
But now that I think about it, we evolved from spectacle peddlers and jewelers who probably offered free exchanges or maybe charged for an upgrade out of their trunk. When Rxs became so specifically custom made they probably should have dumped the remake idea, but I guess with essilor's help, it stuck and we are too. Thanks.
Actually the first Progressives surfaced in North America were the ones made by Hoya which we surfaced in my lab in Montreal from 1964 to 1969, until they started their own.
The Essilor agency belonged to 5 Optometrists starting in 1964 and sold only their frames until they went bankrupt in 1988 and Essilor France stepped in and took them over. The rest is history.
Thanks for the correction. I didn't realize my history didn't go back far enough. I think the only "no line" multifocal mentioned in my old textbook "Ophthalmic Optics" by Morgan and Peters (Hank Peters taught it and Meredith Morgan was my dean) was the Younger "Seamless" or "Inviso" Blended bifocal, although I never used that lens and my memory on that lens may be off as well.
Last edited by Dr. Bill Stacy; 11-29-2015 at 04:49 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks