The end could be near

[eeopti]

Then the answer is reciprocity or a nationally accepted license. Not "no licensure". I thought that was your position.

My position is that current requirements blocks those with experience from moving forward in their career. If it is merely a test, then with experience they should be able to pass.
I would also support licensing being optional, as it is with many other skilled trades. Leave it up to the consumer to decide where they want to take their business. If the license is truly that much more valuable to the public then licensed professionals will not be threatened.

[wmcdonald]

Hi Warren, nice to "see" you again. I had no idea of the political implications of the apprenticeship path. What you describe is pretty darn close to the home-schooling path and makes a great deal of sense to me. I hope we can convince the legislature or the Governor's commission that structured apprenticeship study is the equivalent of classroom education, but if we must cave on this issue, we must.

Andrew, it is never going to be equivalent, and will lack the depth and breadth of formal education. In an apprenticeship, you are largely limited to the knowledge and experience of the preceptor. Many of those are now the manager at Walmart or Lenscrafters who judge the quality and value of an Optician by sales volume. But schools need more as well, and that is why we require what NC refers to as an "internship" for 6 months are the end of school prior to licensure. Apprenticeship will remain, but I hope it is tightened up a bit!

[wmcdonald]

My position is that current requirements blocks those with experience from moving forward in their career. If it is merely a test, then with experience they should be able to pass.
I would also support licensing being optional, as it is with many other skilled trades. Leave it up to the consumer to decide where they want to take their business. If the license is truly that much more valuable to the public then licensed professionals will not be threatened.

But the truth is they do not pass. The ABO has a poor pass rate of less than 60%. The NCLE worse. AN in NY, Opticians must have education and training in both spectacles and CLs. People on this board that loudly claim to be professionals had to take 3x to pass the simple NOCE! What you are saying does not work, and it has been solidly proven over the years. Sadly, you do not even understand what licensing is, so your argument is invalid. Is a driver's license mandatory? Of course, just like every other kind of license. It is mandated.......that means required, and not voluntary.

[Jarhead Daddy]

My position is that current requirements blocks those with experience from moving forward in their career. If it is merely a test, then with experience they should be able to pass.
I would also support licensing being optional, as it is with many other skilled trades. Leave it up to the consumer to decide where they want to take their business. If the license is truly that much more valuable to the public then licensed professionals will not be threatened.

Bingo!

[wmcdonald]

Wmmcdonald, you are relying on government to advance your field. Why not rely on competition and innovation?

You are incorrect, Sir. The government is lonely certifying we have a baseline of knowledge to meet the standards. There is plenty of competition, and we are at a significant disadvantage, due to poor education, training and licensure.

[Jarhead Daddy]

Advocating state-mandated licensure = reliance on government to hold your standard.

[Barry Santini]

I think the minimum standards in place for licensure are more than "adequate" for adequate care.

Superior standards of care are not part of the USA's legislative culture.

Too many would be "left behind."

B

[eeopti]

http://www.nremt.org/nremt/about/legal_opinion.asp

Licensure vs. certification. I am for certification, and against licensure for opticians for the following reasons:

1. Certification encourages advancing a profession in an environment of liberty and choice. Licensure is compulsory, and can be abused to form a regime that protects itself from the competition of outsiders and innovation (as the MDs of NV have done with glaucoma treatment, and the ODs have done with private practice ownership).

2. Certification boards are more flexible. For instance, I may want to be ABO certified, but have no interest in CL dispensing in my business model. But in NV, I cannot start an eyeglass shop without acquiring my NCLE, and passing the CL fitting portion of the state board.

3. Certifications are more often tiered. Anybody here have a Master ABO?
http://www.abo-ncle.org/ABO/Certific...4-f3e881fee795

Just because somebody is against compulsory legal measures does not mean they are slack, or against advancing the industry.

This. Thank you.

[Tigerclaw]

John Q. Public is a proven moron when it comes to dealing with the eyes, which is why I am all for reasonable government enforcement in this field. Nobody questions the roles or training of people in medicine or dentistry, but when it comes to the eyes, it's supposed to be entry level? This attitude is why you have people working at The Gap one day, then get hired at Walmart vision the next and are suddenly "opticians". How many times are you supposed to go to the dentist? "Twice a year." When are you supposed to have an eye exam? "When I can't pass my drivers license exam". There are too many hands in the cookie jar, and far too many corporate interests. People are confused and the bar is being lowered for all of us, seeing as how all these long "O" words get lumped in together. Opticians and ophthalmic techs should at a minimum be certified (or grandfathered in). Licensure is too high a bar for the demand to be met. I think you should unify around that fair compromise, personally. "Certified" is indistinguishable from "licensed" to John Q. Public, but in my experience "certified" is a world of difference from "hired off the street".

[newguyaroundhere]

John Q. Public is a proven moron when it comes to dealing with the eyes, which is why I am all for reasonable government enforcement in this field. Nobody questions the roles or training of people in medicine or dentistry, but when it comes to the eyes, it's supposed to be entry level? This attitude is why you have people working at The Gap one day, then get hired at Walmart vision the next and are suddenly "opticians". How many times are you supposed to go to the dentist? "Twice a year." When are you supposed to have an eye exam? "When I can't pass my drivers license exam". There are too many hands in the cookie jar, and far too many corporate interests. People are confused and the bar is being lowered for all of us, seeing as how all these long "O" words get lumped in together. Opticians and ophthalmic techs should at a minimum be certified (or grandfathered in). Licensure is too high a bar for the demand to be met. I think you should unify around that fair compromise, personally. "Certified" is indistinguishable from "licensed" to John Q. Public, but in my experience "certified" is a world of difference from "hired off the street".

I have personally seen general managers/regional managers hire girls from Victoria Secret to sell and dispense eyewear because they were "cute" and "great sales people" only for these same managers be out of a job 18 months later because of poor performance in the stores.

[Tigerclaw]

I have personally seen general managers/regional managers hire girls from Victoria Secret to sell and dispense eyewear because they were "cute" and "great sales people" only for these same managers be out of a job 18 months later because of poor performance in the stores.

I won't get into too much detail but yeah, the predatory nature of managers/regional etc. for people of the opposite sex in this field is borderline criminal.

[ml43]

I have personally seen general managers/regional managers hire girls from Victoria Secret to sell and dispense eyewear because they were "cute" and "great sales people" only for these same managers be out of a job 18 months later because of poor performance in the stores.

story of lux in SoCal at the present moment, and it goes all the way up to the regional level

[Jarhead Daddy]

John Q. Public is a proven moron when it comes to dealing with the eyes, which is why I am all for reasonable government enforcement in this field.

This is the big difference between statists like you, and libertarians like me. You believe that people are "morons" and coercion is the answer. I believe government is mostly incompetent, and liberty is the answer.

[Jarhead Daddy]

Gotta go fix a toilet. Have fun with the debate.

[eeopti]

It certainly IS true, Sir!! An Optician can be a stand-alone if he/she chooses and open their own office under their professional license. That is what I mean by INDEPENDENT profession, if it was not clear. ODs are great. I consult with several regularly, and have lectured at a number of their conferences over the years, but the truth is they often do NOT hire a licensed Optician, and can and do leave these unlicensed people alone to dispense glasses all day. Again, you have no idea of the reality here.

Yes they CAN be independent. But you are wrong that ODs can leave unlicensed professionals alone to dispense. At least under NY law. But you are correct that they do. Again, it is the unlicensed, knowledgeable, experienced professionals getting the short end of the stick here.

[Tigerclaw]

This is the big difference between statists like you, and libertarians like me. You believe that people are "morons" and coercion is the answer. I believe government is mostly incompetent, and liberty is the answer.

"Statism" has a meaning other than "belief in more government than the new wave of 'libertarians' who woke up one day and decided they'd get into politics, follow the most overly simplified doctrines, and suddenly be the smartest guy in any room they entered." There are times when we need government to protect the viability of people doing things the right way from the ability of the deadly combination of free market + public ignorance to leave the wise minority with no options.

[Paul Smith LDO]

Advocating state-mandated licensure = reliance on government to hold your standard.

I would have to strongly disagree with this statement. WA State DOH, does not have the man power to perform surprise inspections on all Optical's and Dispensary's. The DOH relies on whistle blowing from the public and the men and women who hold licenses for this profession in WA. As to the standards, for many years it has been the OAW along with support from the, School of Opticianry, that has been responsible for the set of standards. The movement to push Licensure to the curb has been cooperation's; they have been looking for any chink in our armor to do away with any licensing, to lower their bottom line. Take a look at one, Rivet and Sway, to see an example of the OAW's work. An on line entity selling prescription eyewear using clothing boutiques as their showrooms and dispensaries.

[eeopti]

But the truth is they do not pass. The ABO has a poor pass rate of less than 60%. The NCLE worse. AN in NY, Opticians must have education and training in both spectacles and CLs. People on this board that loudly claim to be professionals had to take 3x to pass the simple NOCE! What you are saying does not work, and it has been solidly proven over the years. Sadly, you do not even understand what licensing is, so your argument is invalid. Is a driver's license mandatory? Of course, just like every other kind of license. It is mandated.......that means required, and not voluntary.

You do not have to be a licensed mechanic to be a mechanic. However, there is an option to be a licensed mechanic. I certainly DO understand what a license is. Again, leave it up to the consumer to decide how valuable the license is. I have gone to several unlicensed mechanics and walked away is a fixed car that is safe to drive.

[Uilleann]

So to run with the driver's license analogy as presented above...

Does a drivers license require advanced/expensive schooling in all 50 states to apply? Are requirements dramatically different from state to state? Who gets to decide what are the ongoing CE requirements to be able to drive? How is enforcement ensured across state lines? Who makes the determination for minimum competencies from state to state, and how to they ensure comparability with the other 49 states? How long can someone drive without a license if they're never pulled over? What are the protections for the public when a driver is licensed, but can't see 20/40 or better, has a undetected / non-reported visual field defect, or other medical condition that could create a major hazard to other drivers, property or pedestrians? Does someone who has caused property damage, or perhaps injured or even killed someone while operating a vehicle automatically loose their license?

[Jarhead Daddy]

"Statism" has a meaning other than "belief in more government than the new wave of 'libertarians' who woke up one day and decided they'd get into politics, follow the most overly simplified doctrines, and suddenly be the smartest guy in any room they entered."

So I am getting the idea that you think libertarians are as moronic as John Q. Public? Square me away then, how is licensure not a "statist" solution?

There are times when we need government to protect the viability of people doing things the right way from the ability of the deadly combination of free market + public ignorance to leave the wise minority with no options.

Agreed. Drivers' licenses are a great example. Opticianry is a poor example. Errant drivers kill people every day. Errant opticians don't.

[Jarhead Daddy]

Finished my bathroom repair, and I did it without a licensed plumber. I used dangerous power tools, chemicals, and affected the city plumbing system (in a very small way). It was much more dangerous and technical than dispensing glasses. No license necessary.

[eeopti]

Finished my bathroom repair, and I did it without a licensed plumber. I used dangerous power tools, chemicals, and affected the city plumbing system (in a very small way). It was much more dangerous and technical than dispensing glasses. No license necessary.

Excatly!

[Tigerclaw]

Finished my bathroom repair, and I did it without a licensed plumber. I used dangerous power tools, chemicals, and affected the city plumbing system (in a very small way). It was much more dangerous and technical than dispensing glasses. No license necessary.

So everyone can handle all that at no risk? Saved a few bucks and risk your life? What was that about distancing yourself from the stupidity of John Q. Public?

Besides, there's a big difference from taking the risk that only harms yourself and taking one that harms others.

[ml43]

You do not have to be a licensed mechanic to be a mechanic. However, there is an option to be a licensed mechanic. I certainly DO understand what a license is. Again, leave it up to the consumer to decide how valuable the license is. I have gone to several unlicensed mechanics and walked away is a fixed car that is safe to drive.

since you keep bringing this up. I have actually worked as a certified/licensed auto technician for 4 years.

I have worked with about 100 other techs in that time frame, some certified/licensed, most not.

I cannot count the number of times I've had to fix their mistakes that could have killed someone. luckily either me or one of the other techs caught it or the driver noticed it before they hit the freeway.

[Paul Smith LDO]

Finished my bathroom repair, and I did it without a licensed plumber. I used dangerous power tools, chemicals, and affected the city plumbing system (in a very small way). It was much more dangerous and technical than dispensing glasses. No license necessary.

Errant opticians, as you call them, have created a tremendous amount of work for myself, fellow, LDO's, along with the OD's and OMD's who write the prescriptions. Simple example, I see daily and talk to the Doc who has to explain to the patient the cause and effects of unwanted prism. Will it kill the patient, not hardly, does it take away the ability to receive the best possible result of their Rx, yes. We could and probably will go on and on with examples of poorly executed eyewear and folks will say these errors will weed out these, errant opticians, haven't seen that yet. Oh, cleaned out my gutters today, hope that adds some relevance to the conversation. Please, support NC's Licensed Opticians and write a letter, I will.