imstandinghere

Name:
Location: Berkeley, CA, United States

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

We need a lobbyist to serve OUR interests. My letter to the Business and Professions Committee may be falling on deaf or shut off ears.

Dear Senator Oropeza (via fax) and Assembly Committee on Business and Professions:

SB731, as it is written, is not good for consumers or future providers of touch.

I have written extensively (see links below) in opposition to the state level licensing or certification of massage aka massage therapy. Now I want to suggest a licensing program that would be good for all, rather than for the benefit of those providing programs of 250 hours or more of training in a state approved program.

Albeit reluctantly, I agree ALL those providing massage or touch for income should be licensed by the state for the following reasons:
  • It is too easy in an unlicensed environment for activity outside of straightforward massage to be provided by folk involved in illegal activities. Fingerprinting and an application would immediately criminalize those not willing to go through a simple process.
  • A very large pool of folk from all levels of training would reduce the expense of the basic requirements of licensing which I believe should be comparable to those for operating a motor vehicle.
  • It would be beneficial to legitimate professionals because of having an easily acquired ID they could use on a statewide basis.
  • It would be beneficial to employers who could use the system for background checks. Hospitals, insurance providers, Chiros and other licensed healthcare providers could be mandated to employ only those with certain levels of training.
  • Licensing would be beneficial to cities and counties because of having a resource for a background check for those looking to work in their community. It would be beneficial to consumers who bother to ask for credentials.

An online resource comparable to that of the Ohio massage board could be a resource for the public. http://www.med.ohio.gov/MTlicexam.htm Rather than being only medical, the board would be broader.

Following are opening suggestions for state licensing:

First, one needs to acquire a learners permit... Fingerprinting, background check and proof one has agreed to learn from a Registered Class A license holder for at least one hour of formal training or is registering at an approved institution. A test could be created that would test a persons knowledge of the law, very much like the test given to folk wanting to drive a motor vehicle:

  • 1-99 hours of formal training gets a Class C license... Holder is free to market themselves as a Class C provider of touch.
  • 100-499 hours of formal training at a state approved institution gets a Class B license... Holder is free to market themselves as a Class B provider of touch
  • 500 hours of training or more at a state approved institution gets a Class A license... Holder is free to market themselves as a Massage Therapist

I choose the word provider as opposed to practitioner because I do not believe many practice doing massage. One provides massage at all kinds of levels of expertise. Medical folk practice medicine.

In closing, California is the home of the Human Potential Movement which began in the 1960's at Esalen. California has been a bellwether state in many arenas. Make California a bellwether state keeping the field of touch/massage wide open to all that wish to indulge rather than just to those laying out large amounts of money that would benefit the coffers of schools and other industry segments. I have been providing touch since 1986.

My initial training was 100 hours. The training has yet to end.

Sunday, June 03, 2007

POLITICS: Only two individuals oppose licensing or certification in CA.


There has been a bit of activity on the bodywork politics list. The writings are public and can be read at http://tinyurl.com/25qfqo To post you must join the group.

To fully understand the context of the excerpts, start with http://tinyurl.com/yof83f. The following excerpts come from http://tinyurl.com/3yy48h

I wrote, "It is pretty evil for the Amta, against all the resistance and pleas for compromise to have gone to the government in so many states imposing unnecessary regulations on those who would touch for income. The analogy of Shreks evil brother fits, especially when one considers the innocence and niavete of many that get into this line of work."

Amta-CA law and legislation co-chair Beverly May Shultz wrote, "Beyond you & Carl (Brown), there has been very little pleas and resistance in CA -mostly increasing expressions of support. Why do you think ABMP is fullyinvolved? And only a couple of schools do not support the bill - eitherbecause they want more hours or less. Meanwhile, cities and counties arepassing new ordinances all over on their own, and none of them are pretty."

Unfortunately, because of the lack of an organized resistance, it sometimes feels that way. CA is a lobbyist state and those working with lobbyists have the power. The only way to overwhelm that power is too inundate the legislators with an incredibly large number of letters of oppostion. Now is the time to start doing that. To find your CA state assembly person or senate member, go too: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html

Also, in an effort to create an organized opposition to Amta efforts in CA, I have set up a site where you can put your money where your mouth is if in opposition. Check it out at: http://massage.meetup.com/307/?gj=sj6 All proceeds beyond $72 will be donated to the Florida Touch Institute if the effort fails. Stating that does not imply any connection to the FTI.

Following is a post from James Nally, ND regarding SB731. James is one of the school owners alluded to by Beverly May Shultz.

SB 731

SB 731 passed the State Senate yesterday with 29 votes in favor and 4 votes opposed. It is now going to the State Assembly to be heard by various Assembly committees then by the entire Assembly. It looks like it is on a fast track to passing this year. I think the best opportunity to make any changes to the bill will be when it comes before the Assembly Business and Professions Committee.

SB 731 is the reincarnation of SB 412 which died in the last legislative session. While statewide registration of massage practitioners may have some benefits, there are problems with some of the provisions in SB 731. The biggest concern is with the phasing out of the 250 hour massage practitioner tier in 2013. This will require that anyone entering the profession after that will need a minimum of 500 hours of education to get started.

Phasing out the 250 hour tier would greatly increase the cost of entering the massage profession. This would effectively close the door to people who want to do massage avocationally, part -time, or just to help family and friends. The increased cost of training would also have a negative impact on the number of therapists who would do volunteer work with hospice organizations, etc.

Phasing out the 250 hour tier would negatively affect the smaller massage schools. The larger career schools would be better situated to offer 500 hour programs, but because they are not focused on massage therapy they will not have the diverse selection of classes that a massage school would. Without financial aid programs and the economy of scale it will be very hard for the massage schools to compete. The net result will be a lower quality of education, less diversity of training, and fewer continuing education choices for therapists.

Around 60% of California massage schools offer programs of less than 500 hours. These schools serve the needs of a highly diverse California population, including those transferring from other professions, those learning while meeting family and community responsibilities, and those of ethnic, non-English, or poor backgrounds working hard to fulfill their potential. For these groups, the 250 hour tiers meets an important and continuing economic need for rapid entry to massage practice so that their career dreams can continue.

Low-income students need to begin earning an income as soon as possible, and those who have other responsibilities such as family and job but who want to take advantage of this educational and economic opportunity might not even be able to even enter the field if required to begin with 500 hours. Many don't qualify for education grants, and student loans simply increase their economic burden. The national trend toward requiring a minimum of 500 hours of training would close the door of opportunity for these disadvantaged people if it became the standard in California.

Senate Bill 731, on the face, creates a voluntary certification. However, when combined with local regulations, it can be anticipated to have the effect of a practice act in that it would be mandatory in many urban regions. Where the state leads, the cities and counties will follow. It is likely that any standard set by the state will be adopted by the cities and counties, which means that a one-size fits all law could mean the beginning of the end of the great diversity of massage practice in California.

To see the language of the bill please go to: http://tinyurl.com/2htqbd