U.S. Politics: consolidation
Robert VanHook
Description
Collection
Title:
U.S. Politics: consolidation
Creator:
Robert VanHook
Date:
1/29/1999
Text:
The following is a letter from AOPA President Ronney Snell, CPO in response
to an earlier posting from John Billock, CPO.
Robert T. Van Hook, CAE
Executive Director
American Orthotic and Prosthetic Association
1650 King Street, Suite 500
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703/836-7116
Fax: 703/836-0838
Email: <Email Address Redacted>
Webpage: www.opoffice.org
____________
Dear John,
I'd like to begin my response to your recent email with the reminder that I
hold you in the highest regard, both personally and professionally. We
have known each other a long time and I value you as a well-respected
friend. Your opinions are important to me, though we may not always
agree.
I was not actively seeking re-election when I ran for President of AOPA.
The majority of the individuals who encouraged me to enter the race are
your peers; the younger members of AOPA. However, after many years as an
active member, I must set the record straight by telling you that the AOPA
you describe no longer exists, has not existed for quite some time, and
perhaps never existed.
Professionals in the field of prosthetics and orthotics were involved in
governmental relations before AOPA was conceived. It was the profession
itself which made the decision early on that AOPA should carry on this
function. These were the same individuals which established the Academy
during this same time frame. These were good decisions to support the
growth of the profession at that time.
You are mistaken when you charge that AOPA does not utilize all of it's
resources. The working relationship with AAOP has continuously improved
with Tom Gorsky as the E.D. The Academy has helped us with attendance at
the Annual Policy Forum. Five young members, who I believe are all also
Academy members, have important positions on AOPA committees. This
consolidation was not initiated by AOPA, but rather by the National Office
Executive Committee where AOPA had only one vote of three and Don Holmes
was chair. This action was also recommended by two separate outside
consultant firms.
I'd also like to address the issue of the impact of the big two. While
we have more affiliates and fewer full members, our numbers have not
decreased. Our financial surplus grows in spite of using its earnings to
keep dues down. In fact, the dues of the small independent practitioner
decreased this year. The dues of the affiliates were increased. The big
two aren't pulling out. They wish to stay and are paying more to do so.
One dues payment alone was for over $75,000.
AOPA is not struggling. We frankly are quite well organized. With our
successes in government, and improved educational efforts by the Academy, I
would have to say the sum of the whole is greater than it 's two parts.
The cost of the meeting was negligible for AOPA we had to have a board
meeting. We merely stayed over after the conference.
John, I wish you had come to the conference and that we would have had a
chance to discuss your concerns. In the absence of attending the
conference, I wish that you would have called to personally discuss these
issues before sending a statement through email. I would have rather have
discussed it differently than this. If consolidation does or does not
occur, my personal feelings for you will not have changed. The process to
this point has helped AOPA and AAOP work together., a process beneficial to
all.
I am not asking that you change your position. I know that your choices
are made from your heart. But, I do ask that you re-evaluate your position
on AOPA. It, too, is life's blood for the profession of Prosthetics and
Orthotics.
Ronney
to an earlier posting from John Billock, CPO.
Robert T. Van Hook, CAE
Executive Director
American Orthotic and Prosthetic Association
1650 King Street, Suite 500
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703/836-7116
Fax: 703/836-0838
Email: <Email Address Redacted>
Webpage: www.opoffice.org
____________
Dear John,
I'd like to begin my response to your recent email with the reminder that I
hold you in the highest regard, both personally and professionally. We
have known each other a long time and I value you as a well-respected
friend. Your opinions are important to me, though we may not always
agree.
I was not actively seeking re-election when I ran for President of AOPA.
The majority of the individuals who encouraged me to enter the race are
your peers; the younger members of AOPA. However, after many years as an
active member, I must set the record straight by telling you that the AOPA
you describe no longer exists, has not existed for quite some time, and
perhaps never existed.
Professionals in the field of prosthetics and orthotics were involved in
governmental relations before AOPA was conceived. It was the profession
itself which made the decision early on that AOPA should carry on this
function. These were the same individuals which established the Academy
during this same time frame. These were good decisions to support the
growth of the profession at that time.
You are mistaken when you charge that AOPA does not utilize all of it's
resources. The working relationship with AAOP has continuously improved
with Tom Gorsky as the E.D. The Academy has helped us with attendance at
the Annual Policy Forum. Five young members, who I believe are all also
Academy members, have important positions on AOPA committees. This
consolidation was not initiated by AOPA, but rather by the National Office
Executive Committee where AOPA had only one vote of three and Don Holmes
was chair. This action was also recommended by two separate outside
consultant firms.
I'd also like to address the issue of the impact of the big two. While
we have more affiliates and fewer full members, our numbers have not
decreased. Our financial surplus grows in spite of using its earnings to
keep dues down. In fact, the dues of the small independent practitioner
decreased this year. The dues of the affiliates were increased. The big
two aren't pulling out. They wish to stay and are paying more to do so.
One dues payment alone was for over $75,000.
AOPA is not struggling. We frankly are quite well organized. With our
successes in government, and improved educational efforts by the Academy, I
would have to say the sum of the whole is greater than it 's two parts.
The cost of the meeting was negligible for AOPA we had to have a board
meeting. We merely stayed over after the conference.
John, I wish you had come to the conference and that we would have had a
chance to discuss your concerns. In the absence of attending the
conference, I wish that you would have called to personally discuss these
issues before sending a statement through email. I would have rather have
discussed it differently than this. If consolidation does or does not
occur, my personal feelings for you will not have changed. The process to
this point has helped AOPA and AAOP work together., a process beneficial to
all.
I am not asking that you change your position. I know that your choices
are made from your heart. But, I do ask that you re-evaluate your position
on AOPA. It, too, is life's blood for the profession of Prosthetics and
Orthotics.
Ronney
Citation
Robert VanHook, “U.S. Politics: consolidation,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 24, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/211175.
