Do you think it is unethical for an optometrist to charge a dispensing fee and at the same time get a volume discount from the supplier?
No. It's misleading, hypocritical and possibly illegal.
Yes it's okay. What the patient doesn't know won't hurt them.
It's rude, but I wish I could do it.
Not sure. It's a grey area of law.
Do you think it is unethical for an optometrist to charge a dispensing fee and at the same time get a volume discount from the supplier?
It is not ethics, it is business. Why would the patient care exactly what the optical's costs were? Do they also care about rent, supplies, utilities, etc. Come on....
Perhaps if the patients were told the cost of all the goods and it was incorrect then you'd have an ethical problem.
I think he is reffering to Ontarios regulations on optometry to charge a COG + Dispensing fee, I still say it's just business. If the patient doesn't like it let them move on.Originally Posted by orangezero
1st* HTML5 Tracer Software
1st Mac Compatible Tracer Software
1st Linux Compatible Tracer Software
*Dave at OptiVision has a web based tracer integration package that's awesome.
oh.
So, does the original poster think there should be a discount on the dispensing fee, or that it shouldn't be charged at all?
I think the point is that ODs in Ontario us the Cost plus system. And if I'm not mistaken, this thread is more of a reply aimed at Excalibur for his Markup thread. I have no problem with ODs getting discounts on their frames. Where the problem can come up is if the ODs are going out of their way to tell their patients what they're paying for is the exact cost of the glasses, plus their dispensing fees, then turning around and getting the discount. From one of the threads Excalibur started, he's pointed out many times that his receipts show cost, and he tells his customers that. I don't see this as any difference from me getting a discount from my lab, but then, I won't lambaste someone for 'hidden fees' then readily accept my large discount from the frame manufacturers. But that might just be me.
Edit: I'm not voting because I don't like the options. I'd put mine down as "Yes, it's fine. That's how business works."
That is my simple point.
do opticians in Ontario feel threatened by the dispensing optometrists fee model (ie. cost plus dispensing fee)?
A good topic for another thread. Why not participate in this one first?
I did participate. I voted.
yes, it is anti-competition and should be against the competition act.
Should be against the competition act? Please elaborate.
Well you have to look at the competition act and what its intent is. For instance, it is illegal for a business to sell below cost with the attempt to push its competition out of business. So now we have existing opticians, a trade, who have been doing business for years. There is rampant competition, so the prices charged are rather fair.
Now ODs enter the market and specifically force its members to sell at a price where the previous trade could not make a profit. To add to that, the opticians cannot even hire ODs or be hired by ODs, so it is an intentional attempt to force a trade out of business.
The final price charged to the optometric patient for the prescription device is above cost so the dispensing fee becomes the profit. The dispensing fee model was started in 1974, so has it forced any retail opticals to close?
closed many of them in my town. Two independents left.
how many are left? what town?
Well off of the top of my head, it used to have 8 independent Optical (Opticians) stores, and now there are 2 left. Also, all of the Opticians from the closed chains and those closed stores who have gone to work for ODs were forced to drop their licenses.
what city/town?
I was from Thunder Bay, why does that matter?
there are at least 6 non-optometric suppliers in Thunder Bay listed in the phone directory, including several chains. I suggest that these suppliers may have also had something to do with causing the other optical shops to close.
Two independents, like I said. Wal-Mart is not an independent. Of course, some poor business practices can be blamed. But go to Winnipeg, and new optical stores open with and without ODs every day. Not one new independent optical store has opened in over 10 years here. The reason is that the the OD college has developed a pricing system that is encouraged to force independent Opticians out of the trade.
Think about it. Take a $69 frame (cost), $200 lens (PAL) with AR, add $60 for transitions and a $125 fitting fee = $454.
Now take retail of the same product, minus the fitting fee, at a low mark up of 2x = $658
How can you compete
Now, I know what you are saying. 2x is too much of a mark up (even though most places in the World charge way more than that). Well you have to pay the bills. You may get 20 people walk in a day for an eye exam, but no store (other than a wal-mart) who does not offer exams will not see 20 people a day. Just not going to happen. If it did, competition would increase and take those people away. Plus, Opticians have to cover the costs of Doctors errors.
Opticians in Ontario are not asking for a bigger piece of the pie. Just fair rules.
Answer: become an optometrist. Like I've heard it say.... the times they are a changin'. Study hard, do well in school, and you can become an OD.
So what you're asking is for optometrists to do now is to charge more for their dispensing fees and match the prices that opticians charge. Not a good value for the consumer is it?
This is exactly my point. It is forcing out a trade, and not through evolutionary means, but through a planned, systematic idea. Charge a price Opticians cannot match and then prevent them from working with ODs to be able to charge that price. Thus, it should be against the Competition Act.
I think Optometrists should be free to use competitive pricing just like Opticians. Not a planned, colluded pricing scheme. When banks, oil companies and such are suspect of collusion, we freak out. When proven, the government steps in. Don't understand how this is allowed.
Now your solution. I did study hard, got fantastic marks and left the industry for another job. Thank you very much
Edit - Just want to say one thing. For simplicity the term OD is used. I do not blame individual ODs at all. Many of them would welcome competitive pricing. It is a representation of the body who developed these rules and not the practice itself.
I'll tell you what a good value for the consumer is. Take that 30% discount you get on your frame bill and reduce the "real cost" of your patient's frames. Isn't that the responsible thing to do? Especially for someone who stands on top of a stepladder and shouts in a bullhorn how opticians have hidden markups. psht.
Perhaps opticians should do the same thing. Aren't you interested in being ethical too?
You are implying that there is some sort of conspiracy going on. If there is, it's been going on since 1974. Well, let me inform you... there is NO conspiracy going on. The biggest threat opticians have is from chains and corporations. Not from private practices.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks