Business Question

**JennaH** · 01-11-2008, 01:44 PM

Hi all,

Everyone here seems very knowledgeable, so I figured I'd turn here for info. I've been working in the optical industry for almost 10 years and am studying to become a licensed optician. An opportunity to purchase a practice that employs an optometrist has presented itself to me but I'm not sure of the legal aspects of it. Since I am not yet licensed, would I be able to own a professional practice? I've been doing a little research on the web, but have not found anything useful. Thanks in advance for your help.

**DragonLensmanWV** · 01-11-2008, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by JennaH

Hi all,

Everyone here seems very knowledgeable, so I figured I'd turn here for info. I've been working in the optical industry for almost 10 years and am studying to become a licensed optician. An opportunity to purchase a practice that employs an optometrist has presented itself to me but I'm not sure of the legal aspects of it. Since I am not yet licensed, would I be able to own a professional practice? I've been doing a little research on the web, but have not found anything useful. Thanks in advance for your help.

Don't know for sure, but usually if there's a doctor on premises you will be OK.
State laws differ.
I'm sure one of the really knowledgeable people will pipe up.

**eyemanflying** · 01-11-2008, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by DragonLensmanWV

Don't know for sure, but usually if there's a doctor on premises you will be OK.
State laws differ.
I'm sure one of the really knowledgeable people will pipe up.

Such as Chris or Darryl. They're your best bet.;)

**Fezz** · 01-11-2008, 02:41 PM

Welcome to Optiboard!!!!

:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

I would suggest that you:

1.) Contact a reputable business lawyer
2.) Hire an accountant

The laws vary so much. Ask the right folks, and have them review anything and everything!

Good Luck!

**chip anderson** · 01-11-2008, 02:59 PM

As a rule optometrist and opthalmologist exempt themselves and their employees from all optician license requirements. They just pass such laws to restrict thier competition.

**Fezz** · 01-11-2008, 02:59 PM

Ex:

Here in Pennsylvania, I can not *employ* an OD, or MD. Opticians are not allowed to. But, there are many ways around such hurdles. Thats where the lawyer(s) come in handy. Its much easier for them to Keep you out of trouble, than it is to Get you out of trouble!

Good luck. Hopefully some of the smart ones will chime in!!

**cocoisland58** · 01-11-2008, 04:40 PM

In Michigan Opticians can and do own the practice and employ the Optometrist. I have worked for two such employers over the years, no actually three. All three better work enviroments than the doctor owned stores.

**Johns** · 01-11-2008, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by JennaH

Hi all,

An opportunity to purchase a practice that employs an optometrist has presented itself to me but I'm not sure of the legal aspects of it. Since I am not yet licensed, would I be able to own a professional practice?

You could own it, the question is, whether you could work as an optician there. My guess would be no, because you can't work under an OD or MD if they are not your employer.

**rbaker** · 01-11-2008, 05:21 PM

Originally Posted by Fezz

Welcome to Optiboard!!!!

:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

I would suggest that you:

1.) Contact a reputable business lawyer
2.) Hire an accountant

The laws vary so much. Ask the right folks, and have them review anything and everything!

Good Luck!

Fezz - There ain't no better advice than the above.
.

**eyemanflying** · 01-11-2008, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by Fezz

Welcome to Optiboard!!!!

:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

I would suggest that you:

1.) Contact a reputable business lawyer
2.) Hire an accountant

The laws vary so much. Ask the right folks, and have them review anything and everything!

Good Luck!

In response to #1, is there such a thing?

**NC-OD** · 01-11-2008, 06:06 PM

DING. DING. DING.

The doctor bashing post from Anderson for January---like clockwork:

Originally Posted by chip anderson

As a rule optometrist and opthalmologist exempt themselves and their employees from all optician license requirements. They just pass such laws to restrict thier competition.

**chip anderson** · 01-11-2008, 06:24 PM

NC-OD Do you really think this is doctor bashing or the truth?

Why would there be a law keeping opticians from employing doctors. Why would there being one keeping opticians from working under and O.D. or MD if not employed by same?

Really like to hear you defend this.

Chip

**LENNY** · 01-11-2008, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by JennaH

Hi all,

Everyone here seems very knowledgeable, so I figured I'd turn here for info. I've been working in the optical industry for almost 10 years and am studying to become a licensed optician. An opportunity to purchase a practice that employs an optometrist has presented itself to me but I'm not sure of the legal aspects of it. Since I am not yet licensed, would I be able to own a professional practice? I've been doing a little research on the web, but have not found anything useful. Thanks in advance for your help.

You will be OK with the law. As long as you have an OD, OMD or LDO on premices every day that you open.

**rdcoach5** · 01-11-2008, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by Fezz

Ex:

Here in Pennsylvania, I can not *employ* an OD, or MD. Opticians are not allowed to. But, there are many ways around such hurdles. Thats where the lawyer(s) come in handy. Its much easier for them to Keep you out of trouble, than it is to Get you out of trouble!

Good luck. Hopefully some of the smart ones will chime in!!

How can it be constitutional for any state to forbid such a business arrangement? The lawyers need to work on that hurdle.
Bob Taylor

**optigrrl** · 01-12-2008, 04:03 AM

Originally Posted by NC-OD

DING. DING. DING.

The doctor bashing post from Anderson for January---like clockwork:

Why is it that in my state, a licensed state for opticians the OD's and MD's are exempt from being required to hire licensed opticians to dispense? I mean, unless (in the rare exception) the OD or MD is on the floor dispensing - why should they be allowed to let a non-licensed person to decide what will work best for the rx they prescribed?

Might as well eliminate the optician all-together. The OD or MD can do it all. Just like there are medical MD's and surgical MD's - have medical OD's and dispensing OD's. Of course, you'd have to pay a dispensing OD a starting salary of around 65k/yr. Unlike the licensed optician whom you could hire to run a signifigant portion of your business for around 40k/yr...IMHO.

Not bashing, just asking.

**cocoisland58** · 01-12-2008, 06:23 AM

So, in states that require an Optician to be liscensed there are all kinds of laws preventing this Optician to actually own a business and employ an Optometrist to do exams? Seems like in gaining one thing another has been given up. Perhaps it is better for an Optician to work in an unliscensed state as he or she has more freedom?

**Johns** · 01-12-2008, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by cocoisland58

Perhaps it is better for an Optician to work in an unliscensed state as he or she has more freedom?

In many cases... I've thought the same thing.

At our regional meetings you've got a bunch of owners fighting to keep the license, so that all their employees will be able to make a higher wage. I have no problem with that, until I interview most future employees and they tell me that joining their state association is a waste of money!

Why am I breaking my a$$ for these folks that don't give a care?:hammer:

**NC-OD** · 01-12-2008, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

NC-OD Do you really think this is doctor bashing or the truth?

Why would there be a law keeping opticians from employing doctors. Why would there being one keeping opticians from working under and O.D. or MD if not employed by same?

Really like to hear you defend this.

Chip

Not me. I think anyone should be able to hire anyone else as long as it's mutually agreeable. Should be totally up to the individuals.

So perhaps your posts should be addressed to the leadership and not to us 'worker bee' ODs. :D

**optical24/7** · 01-12-2008, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by cocoisland58

So, in states that require an Optician to be liscensed there are all kinds of laws preventing this Optician to actually own a business and employ an Optometrist to do exams? Seems like in gaining one thing another has been given up. Perhaps it is better for an Optician to work in an unliscensed state as he or she has more freedom?

Texas is unliscensed and we can't employ a Dr, though we can lease space out to them. It's about the only way an optician can have their own practice since almost all OD and OMD's have dispensaries.

**snowmonster** · 01-12-2008, 10:30 AM

In Indiana, an OD cannot be employed by a non-professional corporation. Our State laws technically even prevent an OD being employed by an Ophthalmologist, although nobody ever challenges that.

I think the rationale of the OD not being employed by anyone else has something to do with making it so that LensCrafters, Pearle, Wal-Mart, Target and all the other chains can't technnically employ them. It doesn't work though, because the OD just leases space from them.

In Oklahoma, OD's can't even lease space from a chain or even share a common entrance. The State Board there is VERY negative towards chains, although they still exist in OK.

**HarryChiling** · 01-12-2008, 10:47 AM

The reason or so I understand it is:

You cannot use the job as leverage to force a doctor to make a decision based upon what's good for the business instead of what's good for the patient.

It sounds pretty good on paper, but you have doctors that work for insurance companies who's sole jobs is to save the company money by denying claims, you have OD's that hire non-licensed opticians to save money which is in the benefit of the business not for the benefit for the patient. (this is not a jab, but an observation).

It's an archaic rule that shoudl be changed, IMO.

**snowmonster** · 01-12-2008, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by HarryChiling

You cannot use the job as leverage to force a doctor to make a decision based upon what's good for the business instead of what's good for the patient.

Well put, Harry. I guess that's what I forgot to add.

**HarryChiling** · 01-12-2008, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by snowmonster

Well put, Harry. I guess that's what I forgot to add.

It's also interesting to note that many of the chains still do it, with the lease by adding in all sorts of clauses and restrictions. There are ways around everything which is what makes Fezz's advice that much more sound as he is literally pointing you to the guys who have the keys to the promise land, the accountants and lawyers.

**cocoisland58** · 01-12-2008, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by optical24/7

Texas is unliscensed and we can't employ a Dr, though we can lease space out to them. It's about the only way an optician can have their own practice since almost all OD and OMD's have dispensaries.

Well then, it's good to be an Optician in the great state of Michigan. Now if we can just drag ourselves out of this recessionn we are in.

**MarcE** · 01-12-2008, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by HarryChiling

You cannot use the job as leverage to force a doctor to make a decision based upon what's good for the business instead of what's good for the patient.

Then of course it follows by the same reasoning that an MD or OD should not be allowed to dispense because they could prescribe based on business reasons instead of medical reasons.

BTW, I have a very cozy relationship w/ my OD and we share the profits. So although I see the unfair double standard, I don't want to see the end of the dispensing Dr.

Also an unfair double standard is licensing of opticians. If it's for the public good, then it should applied as a law without loopholes for Drs. However the legal problems with this is that the oversight board for licensing of opticians has no authority to make rules for Drs. The same for optometry regarding MDs. MDs don't have to follow the law because the state boards of opticianry and optometry have no authority over medical doctors. As an example the Kansas "law" states that a valid spectacle must include a PD. However the "Law" goes on to state that "nothing contained herewith will be construed to limit the abilities or authority of medical doctors" (I paraphrased that). So OMDs don't have to abide by the spectacle prescription "law" or anything else in the statute - even though most of it is for the public good. Likewise, optometrists don't have to abide by the "laws" as stated by the board of opticianry.

It's a legal conundrum. You have passed a statute that you have no authority to enforce.

Here is my logic on the situation. If state requires that only a licensed person dispense eyewear, then it is OK that optometrists be exempt from this law because they are licensed. However they must do all the dispensing, right? And not just be on-site. Of course we all know the reality doesn't approach logic.

Kansas is not a licensed state, BTW.