The Truth

  • admin
  • admin's Avatar Offline
  • Posts: 1161
  • Thank you received: 153

Replied by admin on topic BBC Watchdog Exposé 2011

Posted 15 Feb 2014 18:08 #21

"Techniques like this might be common in the world of double glazing..."

Three years on they've got worse!

I'm sure you'll agree it's time for Watchdog to make another visit, so please send them your story: watchdog@bbc.co.uk
Last Edit:15 Feb 2014 18:10 by admin
The following user(s) said Thank You: HazelJ
  • Danny
  • Danny's Avatar Offline
  • Posts: 43
  • Thank you received: 5

Replied by Danny on topic The Optom.com

Posted 12 Feb 2014 22:37 #22
If anyone needs any more proof of how bad OE are (as if anyone would actually NEED more proof!) then read some of the threads and comments on this website for ophthalmic professionals: theoptom.com/

There is huge hatred towards OE, lots of talk about their dodgy sales practices and awful management, nobody would touch them with a barge pole, and that's from experienced optoms working in the industry.

You have to sign up but it's great reading.
Last Edit:13 Feb 2014 14:07 by Danny
  • On your side

Replied by On your side on topic The Truth (ex OE employee)

Posted 02 Feb 2014 22:24 #23
The pressure model spreads across multiple levels of hierarchy, vertically, horizontally and diagonally.
Surgeons and optoms are at the bottom of the prey - victim list lower than counsellors.

Call centre plays an important role in this model as the evil eye - the big brother's helper.
This multidimensional surveillance and evil bonus system is effective enough to put ignorance, stupidity, and greed before anything else. Every optom and surgeon has many "guardian angels".

However, using this model has some pitfalls too which in turn are the major business killers.

I am not talking about OE now. This is how this industry works.
admin: Thanks for your post, but some of it is a little obscure. I'd appreciate it if you could explain further
:kiss: .
Last Edit:03 Feb 2014 09:33 by On your side
  • Rumours

Replied by Rumours on topic David Moulsdale and Female Staff

Posted 02 Feb 2014 17:41 #24
I have heard Optical Express business practices correlate with a 'face must fit' approach which I am told is deeply ingrained in the Optical Express culture, and most likely led by David Moulsdale.

There are indeed rumours that David Moulsdale himself is keen to ensure that employees, in particular female employees, meet a certain standard in terms of appearance or attractiveness, so the revelations in court are supportive of these rumours about Optical Express culture.

It is also rumoured that catching David Moulsdale's eye can offer an attractive Optical Express staff member career advantages. It has been rumoured that, over the years, he targets and approaches young female employees at work functions.

It is rumoured that there are many in the industry who will not, under any circumstances, work for Optical Express.
Last Edit:02 Feb 2014 18:17 by Rumours
  • I think not quite right

Replied by I think not quite right on topic The Truth & nothing but the truth

Posted 01 Feb 2014 20:46 #25
It is likely that David Moulsdale pressures people at all levels, he has been known to communicate directly with store managers, regional managers and optical assistants. He likes to know exactly what's going on and maintains feedback - but not just through the obvious routes. ie through senior managers or the computer generated performance indicators.

So a Regional Manager or store manager may indeed not know when their performance is being informally reported on by a subordinate.

It is likely that David Moulsdale is not averse to building personal relationships with staff at all levels of his organisation. It is likely that the staff may not realise this may be a part of his wider management style.

Additionally, as far as I am aware, optometrists do not report directly to store managers, they may report to senior optometrists. (Senior/ Optometry Development Managers).

David Moulsdale is likely to be communicating directly with and maintaining strong relationships with influential optometrists within his business.
Last Edit:01 Feb 2014 20:54 by I think not quite right
  • admin
  • admin's Avatar Offline
  • Posts: 1161
  • Thank you received: 153

Replied by admin on topic The Truth & nothing but the truth

Posted 01 Feb 2014 20:04 #26
Whilst at the Employment Tribunal in Manchester this week, hearing the evidence presented by OE's obviously coached witnesses ([strike]surprisingly[/strike] all paid employees) it soon became very clear why sales staff and optoms put such enormous pressure on customers to book surgery and pay a "non refundable deposit" immediately.

This is roughly how it works - OE employees pls feel free to correct me if you disagree or would like to add anything:

David Moulsdale (CEO)
Hugh Kerr (General ops director)
Senior Managers
Regional Managers
Sales counsellors

Then of course there's the surgeon, also under pressure to meet their own targets.

For one day's work I have it on good authority the surgeon is paid approx £32.25 per eye (laser)

To encourage them, once they've reached £1,000 they are then paid £100 per patient.

If not enough patients are booked in to make a surgery day financially worthwhile, they will be rescheduled on an alternative date to ensure the surgeon meets his targets.

This means a minimum of 15 to 20 operations are being performed by one surgeon in one day, hence the comparison to a factory production line you'll often hear mentioned by post op patients!

That might not sound a lot when you consider one eye might only take 10 minutes, but bear in mind that before surgery, the surgeon - who has never met the patient before, must read the patients notes - written by an optom (also paid commission) and programme individual laser cards for each patient based on the optom's readings!

For those confused by the terms, the optometrist is only qualified to perform eye tests, s/he is NOT an ophthalmologist who is the surgeon.

Many months ago I received information form various sources concerning optoms passing unsuitable people for surgery simply to meet their targets, expecting the surgeon to notice and cancel them on the day.

Unfortunately however, it is a fact that the surgeon is under such pressure with back to back patients (eye to eye perhaps) that mistakes are being made.

Sadly I have lots more info far worse than this to tell you in due course!
Last Edit:01 Feb 2014 20:23 by admin
  • FYI

Replied by FYI on topic Do the right thing!

Posted 04 Dec 2013 23:23 #27
Expose corruption and be at peace with yourself!

Public Concern at Work - Making Whistleblowing Work - 0207 404 6609
Last Edit:04 Dec 2013 23:25 by FYI
  • Mr X
  • Mr X's Avatar Offline
  • Posts: 11
  • Thank you received: 0

Replied by Mr X on topic LOWEST OF THE LOW

Posted 25 Nov 2013 10:46 #28

Kenneth. wrote: How many times do I have to say this.
The Optometrists and surgeons make the money-they choose the suitable and unsuitables. Counsellors sell the treatment on the back of who the Optometrists put forward.-Some are sales people, not optically trained.
The surgery staff just do it the (profanity deleted) treatment. They have NO SAY in who is treated, unless they have attained certain levels of knowledge and have confidence and ability to stop them.
Blame the others who decide.
It is NOT Russian roulette. Nobody sits in a room and decides 'lets ruin Mrs A's eyes today'. Complications in surgery unfortunately happen.
If you truly think that people deliberatly decide to ruin eyes then that is ridiculous.

I must agree with the comments from Anonymous on this point.

It may not be the case in your situation Kenneth.

I suspect that for most people on this forum that the "Counsellor" ultimately is the one that talks you into surgery albeit after your eye test, filling you with false hopes of great vision and "You're an ideal candidate" nonsense.

If they don't have an adequate knowledge of the medical procedure and risks, they shouldn't sell the procedure.

Last Edit:25 Nov 2013 12:31 by Mr X
  • Angela

Replied by Angela on topic The Truth (ex OE employee)

Posted 21 Nov 2013 16:41 #29
I applied for a job with OE's call centre and was asked along for an interview. At the interview i was put forward for another position in head office. I went to that interview and got the job. it took 2 and a half weeks to send my contract even though the job was to start in 3 weeks.

2 days after getting the contract OE retracted the offer saying they were going to use a current member of staff instead. One week later, and after me making a complaint, I was re-offered the job.

After being there only 2 weeks I was called in for a meeting and told i was not suited to the role and wasnt showing commitment. I had to leave right away. I was paid 3 weeks wages.

I had cleared their backlog and was left with no work hence why i was let go!!! Since then 2 others have filled the role and have also been let go.

Last Edit:21 Nov 2013 16:46 by Angela
  • Nick
  • Nick's Avatar Offline
  • Posts: 33
  • Thank you received: 0

Replied by Nick on topic LOWEST OF THE LOW

Posted 20 Nov 2013 23:16 #30
Hmmm Faqir Qazi tried to assure me that "he", meaning Optical Express, could fix up my damaged right eye through eye laser surgery. This is despite having undergone three delicate retinal repairs, macular peel over the last 20 yrs

Or was it just a case of, "well we have him in here, let's try and get more money out of him".
by Nick
Moderators: admin

OERML & My Beautiful Eyes Foundation rely on your support to expose the horrors of this unregulated industry.

Your help is very much appreciated!