north carolina changes

**harry a saake** · 11-23-2010, 05:44 PM

Ok, read all about it, proposals for rule changes in north carolina, this is a doozy

go to www.ncopticians.org

**kcount** · 11-23-2010, 06:18 PM

Internet boys aren't going to be happy.

**Jacqui** · 11-23-2010, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by kcount

Internet boys aren't going to be happy.

Not happy at all :D

**Speed** · 11-23-2010, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by harry a saake

Ok, read all about it, proposals for rule changes in north carolina, this is a doozy

go to www.ncopticians.org

Can you summerize the big proposed changes? Looks like the same stuff at a glance. I don't think the online guys have licenses anyway.

**wmcdonald** · 11-24-2010, 09:40 AM

The changes are not drastic at all, in my opinion. It appears the NCOA is not in favor, for whatever reason. That may, as usual, be a control factor, but I am not privy to any real information regarding the issue beyond the links and a letter from the State Board of Opticians. If I remember correctly......and that is getting harder..........this is one of the first real attempts to control online suppliers efforts and look out for the safety of the public. If that is the case, I congratulate this board for taking action. I also see some effort to control businesses and not just the poor Optician who is "managing them". In many cases, Opticians are caught in a quandary. They are hired to manage a dispensary (what many incorrectly call an optical nowadays) and the owners keep the location open whether a licensed individual is present or not. Most of the businesses are not concerned about the quality of the work at all. So long as someone has a license and a pulse, they sit there are "supervise" others doing the work. Lets face it, Opticians are considered labor by most of the businesses I describe and not professionals in the true sense of the word. The board has had little control over that, but just as has been done in Kentucky in 2007 or 2008, they will now be able to fine the business, and not just the Optician "responsible". Pharmacists work in corporate environments as well, but THEY control what they do. We have not had that ability. Maybe this will help. Opticians need to control what happens in the dispensary, and not the store manager who used to be in ladies clothing.

I hope this is well vetted, and we can make improvements.

**Speed** · 11-24-2010, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by wmcdonald

The changes are not drastic at all, in my opinion. It appears the NCOA is not in favor, for whatever reason. That may, as usual, be a control factor, but I am not privy to any real information regarding the issue beyond the links and a letter from the State Board of Opticians. If I remember correctly......and that is getting harder..........this is one of the first real attempts to control online suppliers efforts and look out for the safety of the public. If that is the case, I congratulate this board for taking action. I also see some effort to control businesses and not just the poor Optician who is "managing them". In many cases, Opticians are caught in a quandary. They are hired to manage a dispensary (what many incorrectly call an optical nowadays) and the owners keep the location open whether a licensed individual is present or not. Most of the businesses are not concerned about the quality of the work at all. So long as someone has a license and a pulse, they sit there are "supervise" others doing the work. Lets face it, Opticians are considered labor by most of the businesses I describe and not professionals in the true sense of the word. The board has had little control over that, but just as has been done in Kentucky in 2007 or 2008, they will now be able to fine the business, and not just the Optician "responsible". Pharmacists work in corporate environments as well, but THEY control what they do. We have not had that ability. Maybe this will help. Opticians need to control what happens in the dispensary, and not the store manager who used to be in ladies clothing.

I hope this is well vetted, and we can make improvements.

Thanks for the summary. Most businesses nowadays are looking for what I call paper hangers, and sadly, that is what many opticians have become. It's ture that opticians have very little control over the optical industry nowadays. What can they do? Too much trouble and you could lose a paycheck. I bet you can't find 10 independents in NC. O.D.s have ask themselves too many times, "What do I need him for?" Lots of independant O.D.s around. It will remain so as long as you can have an optical despensary without an optician. As for the on line: Good luck controling anything on line. Aint gonna happen.

**MichaelP** · 11-24-2010, 07:40 PM

The problem with their attempt to control online retailers is that they don't do anything to stop the overseas importers, the guys shipping direct from Hong Kong (who are also likely to be the worst offenders in terms of bad quality). All this does is squeeze companies with offices in the U.S. The regulatory approach needs to be a national one.

Also, all it says is that online sellers need to have a licensed optician on staff, which most online sellers do (again, for the most part the ones that don't are the ones located solely overseas). It didn't seem to specify a NC licensed optician specifically. So, most online companies will be able to just pay a few bucks to the NC board and continue to sell there.

And...it doesn't do anything to a company like FramesDirect, owned and operated by an O.D. and an M.D. under Essilor.

I guess it's a first step though. Seems more to me like regulation for the sake of regulation without any real effect, and more protectionist than protecting the public. But, kudos to them for at least putting it out there.

**Bill West** · 11-30-2010, 07:36 PM

wow!

**fjpod** · 12-01-2010, 07:00 AM

Enforcement is the problem with any regulations. People are not dieing in the streets from internet glasses, and many would argue that consumers are saving a bundle.

Take a look at this article from the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/bu...nted=1&_r=2&hp

In NY, it is technically illegal for glasses to be dispensed without a face to face between the patient and the licensed fitter. Check out this consumer FAQ from the website of the NYS Office of the Professions:

Can I buy my prescription eyeglasses online?
New York State law requires prescription eyewear to be fitted and dispensed in person by a licensed practitioner (ophthamlic dispenser/optician, optometrist, ophthalmologist). Although any number of websites offer the sale of eyewear, the consumer must be aware of a number of things. Prescription eyeglasses are highly customized. There are numerous measurements that go into the fitting and fabrication that cannot be conveyed over the phone or internet. These include, but are not limited to: the shape of your nose and ears, the width of your face and the overall size of your head. Measurements such as these, and bifocal or multifocal height, can only be measured when you are face to face with a dispenser wearing the eyeglass frames you are planning to purchase.

In addition, the form, thickness, and material that your prescription lenses are made of should be discussed with your eyecare professional. A bargain that may be advertised online may result in a pair of glasses being heavier than necessary, or cause eye fatigue or headache.

New Yorkers are advised to be wise consumers and consult their eyecare professional.

But in spite of this, internet sales are booming.

**eyeguystone** · 12-06-2010, 01:19 PM

This could be a good thing in the event that it is equally enforced. That hasn't been the case in a lot of situations in the past. I think that if we have to do a face to face dispense and it strengthens the optical profession it is a good thing. If it puts the online dispensers at risk then so be it. The state can then decide to go after them with EQUAL zeal...
There is another proposed change that restricts selling contact lenses in a quantity that would allow the patient to use them after the expiration date. If the patient wants to do so, they can Rx shop around and buy as many as they wish. That would invalidate any chance of enforcement. The job of the state (board) is not to assume that the Rx is no longer appropriate because it is one day later than expiration. That assumes that the patient is not capable of making the choice to do (or not do) something that would be unwise. How typical of the state to want to penalize us for the patient's ignorance. There IS credibility to opinion...but we don't tell the patients that, do we?