Struck off the Register: No April Fool

Here in the UK the first three-year cycle of compulsory CET has ended and the retention deadline to remain on the General Optical Council (GOC) Optician’s Register has now passed.

Under the rules, registrants were required to return the application form with appropriate payment by mid-March to remain on the Register. Following the end of the first three-year cycle for CET, practitioners additionally had to demonstrate that they had acquired the minimum number of CET points to avoid removal from the register today, 1 April.

According to the GOC, 90% of registrants had successfully applied for retention to the Register by the mid-March deadline. But for those who had not, a notice was sent out on 16 March, which required a response within 14 days. Those who failed to apply within that 14 day period would then have their name removed from the Register.

Furthermore, a list of those who have not renewed, will now be published on the GOC website and will also be distributed to PCTs and other relevant bodies tomorrow.  Before they can resume practising, registrants will then need to apply for restoration, pay a £239 restoration fee, and provide evidence of having gained the correct number of CET points.

Will there be a number of people who actively choose not to re-register? 

There has always been a number of practitioners who have not been happy with the compulsory CET scheme; there is also the ongoing argument on funding for Dispensing CET and there are as many unhappy optometrists who have disagreed with their own CET funding being paid to directly to their employer rather than to themselves. 

Clare Millington, Communications Officer from the GOC informed us that the GOC will be attending Optrafair at the NEC in Birmingham on 21-23 April this year.  Council members and staff will be on hand at the event to answer questions regarding GOC matters, including the CET scheme and Registration.  (For full details visit the GOC website).

But whatever the reasons behind a practitioner’s decision to actively de-register, what implications does this have on their ongoing employment? And, more importantly, was it worth it?