For more than a decade many dispensing opticians in England have deemed the distribution of CET funding as unfair.
At present, most optometrists are eligible to receive a CET grant of £540 to gain the 36 points they need each cycle to register with the GOC, but there is no such funding for dispensing opticians.
This is despite DOs needing the same number of points, across a range of competencies, with half needed through interactive CET. Those registered as contact lens opticians must tick even more boxes for specialist registration, including peer review.
The Association of British Dispensing Opticians (ABDO) has for some time argued its members should receive funding for CET, which has been compulsory since July 2005 when grants were first introduced for optometrists.
However, one dispenser has this week demanded a fairer system in a letter written to Optician.
Bournemouth-based DO Martin Goldman has responded to the GOC’s education review consultation by saying if CET grants cannot be made available for DOs then they should not be provided for optometrists (see 'Letter to the editor' below).
The call for funding was shared by ABDO as the optical body continues to seek a better deal for its members.
Sir Anthony Garrett (pictured), general secretary of ABDO, said: ‘I fully understand the sentiment expressed in Martin Goldman’s letter regarding CET funding for DOs, as does the whole of the ABDO board.
‘Funding for CET is a government decision not a General Optical Council one. The GOC is required to ensure public safety and this done partly through CET. The GOC may have great sympathy with DOs, however, the funding issue is beyond its remit.
‘ABDO understands this concern and we continue to press our case. In the meantime, ABDO remains one of the largest providers of CET so that all its members can access CET free at the point of delivery.’
ABDO could hardly be making its case for free CET at a more crucial moment. Last month its head of policy and development Barry Duncan presented at the National Optical Conference where he told delegates dispensing opticians were looking to increase their scope of clinical practice in the same way optometrists were.
He explained how DOs had an increased presence within Local Optical Committees and were keen to do more towards the provision of low vision and minor eye condition services. In recent years ABDO has also called for DOs to win the right to refract, which would also require increased training.
Indeed, earlier this year the Foresight Sector report, which looked at how the optical sector is set to evolve by 2030, forecast that new technology such as automation and digital platforms would directly impact ophthalmic dispensing education.
Despite the lack of funding, the report noted that among the core GOC competencies for DOs were skills to dispense appropriate optical appliances to children, an understanding of ocular abnormalities and skills to manage low vision patients. DOs were also expected at the very least to have an understanding of the fitting and aftercare of patients with rigid and soft contact lenses, with many going on to become contact lens opticians.
ABDO members gather for a free CET session at last year's Optrafair
The Foresight report asked how the traditional function of the DO might change in the next 14 years, with self-care such as ‘online virtual try-ons’ threatening to undermine the DO role.
DOs were advised to recognise possible disruption from internet players pre-emptively, and assert themselves as recognised experts. All this required more training.
It concluded: ‘There is undoubtedly an occupational threat to regulated ophthalmic dispensing from technology. DOs therefore need to seize educational and CPD opportunities in cutting edge lens technologies, paediatrics, contact lenses, low vision work [including expert knowledge of digital mobile solutions], business communication and IT skills. We may yet see opportunities for DO upskilling into areas of orthoptics, and the notion of the “refracting optician” is a possibility within the timeframe under review.
‘Regardless of the future efficiency and ease of digital automation, most members of the public will still value advice and reassurance from professionals. The DO has thus to ensure they remain an essential guide and adviser to the public. The older, experienced DO needs to understand the Millennial mind-set, while the younger DO needs to develop soft skills to instil confidence in older generations.’
It is not only DOs unhappy with the current system, with an AOP campaign this year saying the system ‘is far from perfect and needs reform’. It said processing claims came with an unreasonable amount of admin for both performers and contractors and was resulting ‘in a significant number of eligible optometrists being unable to claim their CET grant’.
When contacted by Optician, a spokesperson for the GOC reiterated that CET funding was the responsibility of the government. ‘It would be down to the government to consider any changing to CET funding arrangements,’ he said.
In the meantime, practitioners must find their own way to cover professional training for dispensing opticians.
However, Laura Hing, dispensing optician at Hing Opticians, Shefford, Bedfordshire, told Optician she was not sure the system should work in any other way under the current environment.
She added: ‘I think us dispensing opticians are in a difficult position. Lots of people can do our job, people look online to do it, so we need our jobs to be protected. We don’t get the same help that optometrists do. I think there’s a view that we can do it in our own spare time whereas the optometrists have clinics. But it’s not the case, we do it in our evenings and our weekends.
‘But I don’t have a solution for it. I don’t think that the NHS should pay for it, they have better things to spend their money on. Other roles don’t get paid for it either. It’s not the NHS’s problem to do it, we are not employed by the NHS, we are contractors.
‘It is really grating that you get given less job protection and don’t get help. But equally I don’t feel that is the NHS’ responsibility.’
Letter to the editor
The GOC has emailed asking for consultation regarding their plan for the future. They declare they are a learning organisation committed to continuous improvement. They claim to be responsible, forward thinking and principled. In particular, they state their principles build trust because they are consistent and fair to everyone.
So I expect they have a plan, not clear in this document, to uphold their honour and integrity so presented in the much discussed funding of CET for dispensing opticians. To be truly fair they need to either negotiate payment for CET to dispensing opticians or the cessation of it to optometrists.
Either way this would be fair and by their own declaration to promote high standards of education and performance which are currently only, by financial support, apparently important for optometrists.
If the GOC is so principled, going to behave consistently and fairly, then it needs to take action in order to prove this truth or lie? Is the payment for CET to optometrists to cease or is it to be equally paid to dispensing opticians? If neither then the GOC has already disregarded its declared principles for if it cannot manage those then what faith should we have in the rest of its work?
Martin Goldman, dispensing optician, Bournemouth
Additional reporting by Jo Gallacher