Optician Guild/Union or what ever

[wmcdonald]

It is spelled out in the series, and I appreciate you taking the time to read the articles. You can't sell a brand, however, until it is developed. Until it is consistent there is nothing to develop. Look to the articles regarding the idea I floated above. The individual who followed with a lengthy post thought I was comparing Opticians to CPAs, which is not the case......only an analogy. The Society to Advance Opticianry seeks to brand those with academic credentials. Allow them to use the trademarked title Ophthalmic Optician to set themselves apart from the pack by marketing their superior background. There are a few who joined the group, and the Summit has taken many of those ideas forward. Unfortunately they eliminated the education requirements, because, quite frankly (my opinion only) some of the leaders of the thing is a senior executive at Luxottica, and they certainly do not want licensing and education for Opticians to keep us down and underpaid. It provided a platform for branding a consistent product, but has not gained traction. The reason, we continue to let others establish the criteria that defines us. We should establish our own goals and vision for the future, without corporate America, ODs, and others defining it for us.

Warren:

Thank you for your time to answer.

Could you please address the matter of academics vs the ability to sell the academia. Could you verify that you heard the two thoughts below:

1) the problem in branding is not the ability to develop and define standards, it's the ability to sell those standards
2) should you care to develop an independent brand of optician, accountable to the highest of standards, then you could do that

I have read the first of your series The American Optician - where do we go from here

[optical24/7]

How many time here do we see folks looking for *free* CE's, *free* course instructions for passing the NOCE, *free* this and *free* that? Opticians are a stingily frugal bunch. The OAA gets more money from sponsor companies than it does from member opticians! They (opticians) are not (as a whole) going to pay for some quasi membership into a group to better educate themselves. If they were, there'd be more members of the NAO. And why should they? For the vast majority it will not lead to more pay or better jobs. The majority couldn't give a flip about advancing Opticianry as a whole, all they want is a paycheck to get them by till the next pay check.

Dreams of advancement and or licensure in non-licensed states is just that...a dream. Licensed states even have had threats of loosing licensures fairly recently (NJ and Ohio). They will be lucky to hold that status in the future. An Optician's PAC would be the only way that Opticians could make advancements, but that takes money..Money that Opticians nor industry will cough up.

If you wish to advance Opticianry, my advice now a days is to advance yourself, forget about advancing the industry as a whole. Educate yourself by whatever means you can. You need to possibly consider re-locating to another city or state if you want that advancement. Get in on the more medical side of Opticianry by working for MD/MD groups where your skills are more sorely needed, the challenges greater and for the most part pay better. You are also more insulated from internet/cheap provider competition.

Advancing Opticianry left the stable long ago, before Warren, I or anyone in practice today gave a rip about it. It's the wild west out there. Get your six shooter and go out there and make your own Eldorado, cause there ain't no person/company/organization/plan on the table that will correct the course of this sinking ship.



(me? cynical? yea....)

[idispense]

It is spelled out in the series, and I appreciate you taking the time to read the articles. You can't sell a brand, however, until it is developed. Until it is consistent there is nothing to develop. Look to the articles regarding the idea I floated above. The individual who followed with a lengthy post thought I was comparing Opticians to CPAs, which is not the case......only an analogy. The Society to Advance Opticianry seeks to brand those with academic credentials. Allow them to use the trademarked title Ophthalmic Optician to set themselves apart from the pack by marketing their superior background. There are a few who joined the group, and the Summit has taken many of those ideas forward. Unfortunately they eliminated the education requirements, because, quite frankly (my opinion only) some of the leaders of the thing is a senior executive at Luxottica, and they certainly do not want licensing and education for Opticians to keep us down and underpaid. It provided a platform for branding a consistent product, but has not gained traction. The reason, we continue to let others establish the criteria that defines us. We should establish our own goals and vision for the future, without corporate America, ODs, and others defining it for us.

As of yet, I have not found the rest in the series on line. Only the first article in ECP magazine is digital. That was listed as the June 2014 issue.

Could you address the salesmanship side of persuasion to your viewpoints. Even if you had uniform standards set and printed then it would still fall apart on inability to sell the concept.

I note that the Society to Advance Opticianry does not of itself set its own standards but rather looks to other standards to gain entry. In so doing it relies on the standards of ABO and such. I believe I have heard it said that these only require a heartbeat.
I note the statement that "we should set our own goals for the future", why then is ABO promoted to keeper of your gate?

I also take note of the power struggle statement between education requirements and a Luxottica rep. This brings to light a power struggle, loss of control, and inability to sell and persuade others as being the real issue to implementation of educate,legislate, standardization and branding.

[wmcdonald]

OK.......send Jeff at the magazine an email. I am sure they will have it archived. It was in 2012, if memory serves.

[tx11]

How many time here do we see folks looking for *free* CE's, *free* course instructions for passing the NOCE, *free* this and *free* that? Opticians are a stingily frugal bunch. The OAA gets more money from sponsor companies than it does from member opticians! They (opticians) are not (as a whole) going to pay for some quasi membership into a group to better educate themselves. If they were, there'd be more members of the NAO. And why should they? For the vast majority it will not lead to more pay or better jobs. The majority couldn't give a flip about advancing Opticianry as a whole, all they want is a paycheck to get them by till the next pay check.

Dreams of advancement and or licensure in non-licensed states is just that...a dream. Licensed states even have had threats of loosing licensures fairly recently (NJ and Ohio). They will be lucky to hold that status in the future. An Optician's PAC would be the only way that Opticians could make advancements, but that takes money..Money that Opticians nor industry will cough up.

If you wish to advance Opticianry, my advice now a days is to advance yourself, forget about advancing the industry as a whole. Educate yourself by whatever means you can. You need to possibly consider re-locating to another city or state if you want that advancement. Get in on the more medical side of Opticianry by working for MD/MD groups where your skills are more sorely needed, the challenges greater and for the most part pay better. You are also more insulated from internet/cheap provider competition.

Advancing Opticianry left the stable long ago, before Warren, I or anyone in practice today gave a rip about it. It's the wild west out there. Get your six shooter and go out there and make your own Eldorado, cause there ain't no person/company/organization/plan on the table that will correct the course of this sinking ship.



(me? cynical? yea....)

I have to agree with your statement concerning our current situation. MD gigs are few and far between...they "need their OD referals". I suppose the discussion should turn to how an individual optician can make his/her own Eldorado.

[wmcdonald]

I hope not. If we limit our concern to self, and forget those around us, we all lose. This field can improve if......... and I know that is really a big word........if we try.

[tx11]

What about this:
Start a group that has a minimum of ABO certification to join. (I leave out NCLE because there are shops that don't dispense contacts and would still be a good fit)
Make it like a buying group, only requiring more than a monthly payment to stay in. Such as only employing certified opticians, keeping up to date on advances in the field, and standards that go beyond ansi, and continuing to advance in not certifications, but real world knowledge, eventually have our own certifications, and a way to keep the group up to date as a whole.
Have incentives to train new opticians such as lab discounts help with schooling. We could work with local labs to get better pricing for members. Offer quarterly classes or even Moocs to expand our knowledge.
If we get offices to join slowly the name and brand will expand as will our reputation.
It would have to be non-profit, have by laws on how much the people who run it make (Ex: CEO no more than x% of the annual income or 150k which ever is lower. obviously needing work but a gross example) annually and safe guards to keep it honest.
Hell to be honest the big lens companies may even help sponsor it if only to get their names out to the public more. (I know this could be bad but again an idea, maybe just exclude Essilor ;^) )

I see plumbers, electricians, and construction workers organized better than us, and yet glasses are no less important.
Start small, plant the seeds. Make the industry take note of a union/guild that we make. Remember without us, the opticians, the industry as a whole fails. We do have the power and clout we need, we just need to realize it.
(Sorry Reread that and it came off as preachy.)

With almost a 40% failure rate ,I would like an ABO certification to show some sort of meaning (dumbed down or not). Its a start

[tx11]

I hope not. If we limit our concern to self, and forget those around us, we all lose. This field can improve if......... and I know that is really a big word........if we try.

I assume that you are thinking of future "opticians" . I think that much of this type of discussion is trying to deal with the immediate (next 10 years) situation of those in the field. I don't mean to be short sighted ..but are there (IYHO) things that immediately could be done that would make practical difference to those currently in the field?

[Paul Smith LDO]

A ground swell of grass roots, not to get on a political soap box, but look at what the Tea Party was able to do. There would have to be a tremendous up rising on a local level and then a broad sweeping movement nationally. Perhaps we can enlist Sarah Palin and her Kawasaki frame for the ad campaign. Doncha know.

[wmcdonald]

I assume that you are thinking of future "opticians" . I think that much of this type of discussion is trying to deal with the immediate (next 10 years) situation of those in the field. I don't mean to be short sighted ..but are there (IYHO) things that immediately could be done that would make practical difference to those currently in the field?

I do not see much that can be done for folks currently in the field. We must focus on the future, and make it mean more than it currently does.

[m0002a]

When they started, yes they sold only 3 products. A hamburger, cheeseburger and hotdogs. And they only came one way. And by the way, it is spelled Opticianry. You should learn to spell the name of your own profession if you wish to debate the issues.

You are correct that the McDonald's brothers had hot dogs at their original California locations, but I don't think Ray Kroc's company (McDonalds Corporation) has served them in the USA. What we know today as the McDonald's "brand" has nothing to do with the original McDonald brothers stores in CA.They were always separate legal and operational entities.

Kroc singled out hot dogs as the one food beyond even the pale of experimentation: "On the other hand, there's damned good reason we should never have hot dogs. There's no telling what's inside a hot dog's skin, and our standard of quality just wouldn't permit that kind of item."

I am not an optician, so I don't have spell Opticianry correctly. Not being an optician, and having to employ (and pay) them for my own lenses, sometimes gives me a unique perspective from a patient point of view that not everyone on this forum has.

[optical24/7]

I hope not. If we limit our concern to self, and forget those around us, we all lose. This field can improve if......... and I know that is really a big word........if we try.

It's already lost Warren, and has been since prior to you or me entering the field. Opticians are the lazy end of the eye care profession, always has been, always will be. Over a century ago, doctor started specializing in eye health (now OMD's). After that, a group of refracting Opticians decided to start a unified curriculum and got laws passed allowing them to expand scope ( Now OD's), while the other Opticians sat on their laurels and said to themselves..."Go to school? I'd rather drink another beer..."

Years ago, we took the Columbus boat that sank, while the OMD and OD boats sailed on. All that's left now is the flotsam and jetsam we call Opticianry floating on the Optic Sea, blown in whatever direction the winds wishes to take us. We can not build a new boat to sail on because we can't agree on how and what to make our ship out of, let alone agree on a course to sail on.

That does not mean that an Optician can't improve on his own. Make your own life raft. Decide the course you wish to sail. But keep in mind, the wind's gonna blow and you have no control over it.

[idispense]

To all of those who would be tempted to respond in the negative to this thread, before posting negatively ask yourself this question:

"if it were possible, even remotely possible, then would you think standards and branding is a good thing ? "

If your answer to the above question is yes then please don't post anything negative, it's not constructive, it's just apathy and frustrating. If you can say yes to the above question , but you think it can't happen then just copy and post:

"I am a disbeliever but I will listen because it is a good idea."


Warren , could you outline or reprint your article and outline your plan here, if the audience will behave ?

[wmcdonald]

I do not concern myself with the behavior of the group. I know most here understand I am trying to help. I was told quietly by another poster that unfortunately Eye Care Professional recently closed up shop, so I am not sure where to access these articles any longer. I will see if I have a copy of all of them someplace. You can also do a search here and see the meat of the material.

[Hayde]

So the OP bravely asked for opinions that may be out there. Surprisingly, he got a few! ;P

If we were to itemize the major currents:
1. Whatever the fate of the profession is out of mortal control and nothing can be done.
2. The only possible way of 'improving the state of the profession' depends upon advancing legislation of licensure requirements across the country and standardize educational rigors from there.
3. The only possible way of 'improving the state of the profession' depends upon standardizing (voluntary?) educational rigors across the country and perhaps advancing legislation of licensure requirements from there.
4. Promoting general awareness of the profession (by some means to some audience) in hopes of directly or indirectly promoting demand for better quality opticianry may result in some degree of improvement of 'the state of the profession.'

(If anyone feels misstated, please correct me.)

Opticians being natural contrarians, proponents of any one take are less likely to constructively contribute to a discussion entertaining an opposing one. Given the broad scope of this thread, that's been perfectly fine. However, if there's any interest in entertaining any one or more of these positions more sympathetically, they might enjoy the benefit of less static interference in their own respective threads?

And/or perhaps the OP will care to narrow the focus for this thread at some point at his leisure and whim.

[Paul Smith LDO]

To all of those who would be tempted to respond in the negative to this thread, before posting negatively ask yourself this question:

"if it were possible, even remotely possible, then would you think standards and branding is a good thing ? "

If your answer to the above question is yes then please don't post anything negative, it's not constructive, it's just apathy and frustrating. If you can say yes to the above question , but you think it can't happen then just copy and post:

"I am a disbeliever but I will listen because it is a good idea."


Warren , could you outline or reprint your article and outline your plan here, if the audience will behave ?

What!? Am I understanding you correctly, are you seriously asking us to customize our comments so that they are not perceived as controversial and tempered to suit your opinion. Discord, be it healthy or not, leads to discussion. Discussing the pros and cons and weighing opposing points of views is one of the building blocks upon which American was founded on, or any civilized country for that matter. Your asking a hypothetical question, regarding a guild whose ethos has to bridge across 50 states; who have separate guide lines as to what quantifies and defines one as an Optician. If I were to have asked such a question, I would expect the same responses many have shared on this thread.

[keithbenjamin]

No thanks to ECP Mag for making them easy to find but through the power of Google...

The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here?
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part II
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


Educating and Training of the
AMERICAN OPTICIAN:
Where Do We Go From Here? Part III
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part IV
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part V
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part VI
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part VII
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp

[m0002a]

The biggest element of mismanagement was designing and selling poor products. Anyone who lived in Michigan in the 1970s remembers when Detroit began building truly terrible cars, like the Chevy Vega, the AMC Gremlin, the Chrysler Imperial, and the Ford Pinto; it was the beginning of what became a slow-moving train wreck.
[...]
Autoworker wages didn't make the Big Three uncompetitive by driving prices up; poor value drove prices down. As prices and quality fell together, consumers fled. The UAW's contracts were almost irrelevant. One way to show this is to compare the pricing of the competitors' vehicles with the size of the labor cost differential bargained by the UAW. Labor costs make up only 10 percent of the cost of a typical automobile. Before the auto rescue, the Big Three paid $55 an hour in compensation per auto worker while the Japanese paid only $46 an hour. (Company lobbyists and publicists inflated the total Big Three labor cost to $71 by attributing the unfunded pension and health benefit costs for decades of retired workers to the much smaller currently employed workforce; the legacy costs for Japanese transplants were only $3 an hour.) But even if, for the sake of argument, we accept the unfairly inflated $71 figure, the difference in the cost of a vehicle attributable to the UAW (the UAW premium) would be 30 percent of the average 10 percent labor cost, or 3 percent of total cost.
In 2008, according to Edmunds, GM sold its average large car for $21,518. Assuming GM sold its cars at cost, the UAW premium would have been only $645 (3 percent of $21,518). Did the UAW premium raise the selling price so high as to make GM cars uncompetitive with Toyotas? Not exactly. Toyota sold its comparably equipped average large car for $31,753--$10,000 more than GM. It wasn't price that made GM cars uncompetitive, it was the quality of the product and the customers' perception of quality. [The Economic Policy Institute, Working Economics Blog, 5/24/12]

From: http://mediamatters.org/research/201...d-labor/198343

I agree unions are not about cost, it is about quality. Unions almost always require employers to reward people based on seniority, not based on quality.

What is being discussed here is akin to a making an optician a profession, which has certain legal requirements to entry (education, testing, etc) and is substantially self-regulated (along with state regulatory agencies). Similar to lawyers, doctors, and CPA's, none of which are unionized. Professionals are often self-employed, so who are they going to have collective bargaining with?

[wileyguy]

To who's benefit?Puplic opinion is,was and always will be the driving force.Not to be a naysayer but until the public is convinced it is something needed,it will never happen.


Why? Cost.Plain and simple.The amount of money needed to sway public opinion is easy 7 figures,maybe 8.That's just to have a fighting chance.Big corporate would spend that and more.PACs don't work,at least in the context it's suggested.A PAC wants to be a long term solution to a long term problem.They don't want to be anybody's 'quick fix'.They are only going to get on board if they see it as a long term investment.They are ultimately more successful when they have some skin in the game,so to speak.


A number of states ( PA being one ) can't even get their own state licensed.


Many states that require licensure don't have the manpower to enforce it.(New York has 2 full time inspectors for the entire state....for all licenses.Optical,electrical,massage therapy....everything.In the rare case they do find non compliance,their budget doesn't allow for prosecution and are usually limited voluntary and non punitive outcomes.)New York is filled with unlicensed opticians ( I know of this personally) and New Jersey is on the way.Take a look at any job boards such as Craigslist and you get the idea.


Btw.....back to public opinion...I thought it was interesting New York voters voted down the public referendum to take the vision exam requirement off the license renewal,even though their own research showed no statistical differences between New York and the neighboring states that didn't have the requirement.hmmm


I am ABO.I only got it for personal fulfillment at the time,nothing more.Never advanced it, in part,because after taking the ABO test,figured it for just another money maker that I didn't want part of.Never received a penny for it either.


Personally,I'm all for opticians being well educated ( at least optically speaking ),not necessarily degreed.I'm all for licensure.I'm all for the advancement of the profession.I'm all for making more money.However to who's benefit?Most times,when speaking with other opticians about licensure,the first,last and everything out of their mouth is about money.I never hear anything about becoming better educated,becoming a better clinician,a certain level of safety for patients or being held to a higher standard.None of that matters.It's the same in private practice as it is the chains.Nobody wants to take responsibility for being better unless it's at the expense of others.In this case the employer and ultimately,the consumer.At least that's what big corporate is going to shout from the mountains....and a lot louder then we can.


If you truly want to see an advancement of the profession,go for it.You will find support and maybe even the means to see it through.If you want to make good money?Become the best opthamagician you can be.If you have the desire and the capacity,you can become a top flight optician.Really good opticians can and do make good money.That hasn't changed in my 20 plus years .ABO or not.License or not.Union or not.And no union dues :)

[m0002a]

The individual who followed with a lengthy post thought I was comparing Opticians to CPAs, which is not the case......only an analogy. The Society to Advance Opticianry seeks to brand those with academic credentials. Allow them to use the trademarked title Ophthalmic Optician to set themselves apart from the pack by marketing their superior background. There are a few who joined the group, and the Summit has taken many of those ideas forward. Unfortunately they eliminated the education requirements, because, quite frankly (my opinion only) some of the leaders of the thing is a senior executive at Luxottica, and they certainly do not want licensing and education for Opticians to keep us down and underpaid. It provided a platform for branding a consistent product, but has not gained traction. The reason, we continue to let others establish the criteria that defines us. We should establish our own goals and vision for the future, without corporate America, ODs, and others defining it for us.

The analogy to CPA is interesting. A person is not required to be a CPA to offer accounting services to the public, with the one exception being the auditing and certification of financial statements.

Almost all CPA's, MD's, lawyers, etc have lower level people working for them that interact with customers/patients under the supervision (at least in theory) of the licensed professional. Most of these people are not licensed (with the exception of some nurses). So the best that can expected with regard to licensing and regulation of a professional Optician would be to have at least one per store who supervises non-licensed workers. But that already is a legal requirement in many states, so I don't see a big change there.

There will be no federal government regulation to require optician licensing, since Congress only has jurisdiction over interstate commerce. In theory they could regulate the big box opticals that operate in multiple states, but not independent opticians or the optical employees of an OD or Ophthalmologist office. CPA's, lawyers, and MD's are licensed by states, and the state licensing boards often share the same uniform national exam for efficiency and reciprocity purposes, and not because there is any national licensing requirement by the federal government.

I am still not sure what the main motivation and objective of this discussion is? Is it to improve patient care, or to make it more cost effective? Or is it for opticians to increase their income? If it is primarily the later (which I suspect is the main reason) then who is going to pay for higher wages for opticians? Will it be the OD's, MD's, or optical stores that employ opticians, or will the patients have the increased wages passed on to them in the form of higher prices for eye car products?

Given that a decent quality frame and high-quality progressive lens with A/R retails for $700 and higher, it would be a hard pill for the public to swallow to have to pay even more money due to more stringent optician licensing requirements, given that the marginal production cost of these products is substantially less than the retail cost, and gross margins are ridiculously high compared to almost any other business. As I said previously, I doubt there is a correlation between education/exams and being able to recommend the best and/or most cost effective progressive design. The general rule of thumb often given to patients seeking progressives is to seek out an optician who wears progressives themselves, and is old enough to have sufficient experience as to which designs work best for each patient, and not necessarily one who just graduated with a four year degree in an optical field and passed a slew of exams (this applies to OD's also).

But even with the best and most experienced optician, matching of a progressive (and sometimes SV lenses) to the patient often seems to be voodoo according to many opticians on this forum (whom I assume to be way above average in education, skill, and experience). Maybe I am off-base, but this seems to be a much bigger problem than licensing according to the public. If I had a medical, legal, or accounting problem and sought out multiple opinions on what to do form various professionals, I would expect that there would be some sort of eventual convergence of opinion for the correct course of action (most of the time). The odds of that happening in the optical dispensing field are close to nil.

[tx11]

Upon further thought I realized that the scope of opticianry has indeed expanded but not in the direction that many would have liked. Today more and more opticians are required to be insurance filers, front desk and check out ,topflite sales people and to some degree optometric assistants (contact lens I&R classes). It would seem that our scope is being pushed more towards administration than optics and pt care. What happened to the idea of the independent optician refractionist (not eye exams)? IF opticians could independently refract you would see licensing start popping up and a positive change in our fields respect and compensation.

I guess history shows that serious opticianry evolved into optometry which is trying to evolve into primary care.

[idispense]

No thanks to ECP Mag for making them easy to find but through the power of Google...

The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here?
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part II
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


Educating and Training of the
AMERICAN OPTICIAN:
Where Do We Go From Here? Part III
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part IV
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part V
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part VI
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp


The American Optician
Where Do We Go From Here? Part VII
http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2...n-optician.asp

Thank you, Keith

[Uncle Fester]

Bump

I like top of page 5 post #102

Sums up our situation nicely.

[pezfaerie]

Wow resurrected post

[Dawud1213]

LMAO I am just now reading through this thread and was thinking the same thing! if the public realized that a a drunk monkey with a #2 pencil can pass the ABO then the profession would loose what little respect we still have with the public! Those of you who know me know that I have always believed in the educate then legislate route. But it has many many problems. If we as an Opticians collectively could agree on this it would still go nowhere! You would a a large group who is educated but that's it. There is a reason why we have not a a new "licensed" state since 1979. As opticians, our collective pockets are not deep enough to make any changes. I have been on the legislative end for the last few years and have been unable to make any changes due to the influence of the retail giants, Optom's and our fellow opticians who are afraid that if the "bar" is raised it will somehow harm them. I've been in this business over 25 years(not as long as some but longer than most) and nothing has really changed, and I'm going to step out on a limb here and say in the next 25 years there will be no (positive) changes. As to the person who started the thread, learn everything about your craft, take classes, get degree, and be the best Optician you know. If you want to be happy, leave the "advancing Opticianry" political Bull Sh!t to the people who have made a living talking about it.

WoW! Well said and GREAT advice! I too, am a ABOC, CPO passionate Optician whom have been in this field over 20 plus years. SMH! But we as Opticians must look at what we do as Professionals who are extremely valuable to the Optical world. I graduate next month April 25th, 2020 with my MBA in Organizational Leadership. I have a idea in mind that will require Licenced and/or ABOC and above Opticians with "fire" and passion for our craft to educate the many Frame Stylists and Retail Optical "sales people" along with the many private ODs how to effectively run, manage, and grow as a Opticianry business. Again, everything you mentioned was and is The Truth!

The FLY Optician!!!
YouTube channel.
Inspirational Minutes with David!