Good for Seeing Eye for not giving into California is ridiculous license
demands. It is the United States of America and not the United States of
California that is for sure.
JODY 🐺
thunderwalker321@xxxxxxxxx
"There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes."
DOCTOR WHO (Tom Baker)
On Dec 2, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Caitlyn Furness <caitlyn.furness@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
thanks for clearing this up for me.
I agree with TSE’s stance on this as well. and, after, you guys are living
in the United States of America, not the United State of California!!
Cait
On Dec 2, 2015, at 12:24 PM, Buddy Brannan <buddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interestingly, now the CA Guide Dog Board is demanding that any trainer
providing follow-up services in California be licensed by the board. Many of
the schools are knuckling under, paying the fine or whatever, and having
some instructors get licensed by the board. The lone standout at this point
is Seeing Eye, whose position I agree with 100%. That position is that
follow-up services are not instruction. Instruction ends when class ends,
and a student comes home with his dog, one supposes, with the tools to
handle the dog and enable the dog to do his job. Any follow-up services are
a professional coming in as a consultant, not an instructor, and the CA
Board instructional licensing requirements don't apply. I'd love to see the
CA Board go away sooner rather than later. BTW, I suspect that the board
changed its rules somehow for length of class...because in reality, I bet
the board is really the GDB Rubber Stamp.
--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
Phone: 814-860-3194
Mobile: 814-431-0962
Email: buddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On Dec 2, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Caitlyn Furness <caitlyn.furness@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Now, this is interesting.
I know that Seeing Eye, GdF, and other schools that are outside of
California have grads in that state. I also know for a fact that Seeing
Eye did, indeed, provide follow up in Cali if needed by a grad, with a
seeing eye trainer.
Also, the Board of California Guide Dog Schools is the “agency” you are
referring to. It’s interesting to note that while supposedly in their regs
a student is required to be in residence at a school for 28 days for a
first timer and 21 days for a retrain. GDB has shortened the overall class
time to 14 days. So they are not within the regs themselves. Wonder what
is being done about that? Seems to me the Board is not carrying much
weight these days.
Cait
On Dec 1, 2015, at 9:36 PM, Wayne And Harley <k9dad@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
David,
That California agency only has sway in California. There is, I believe
an effort being made to have the certification requirement waived for
trainers from non-Californian schools to provide after care to those blind
individuals that dared to seek a Guide Dog from a non-certified school
outside the borders of California.
Yours, Very Sincerely And Respectfully,
Wayne M. Scace
-------- Original message --------
From: David and his pack of dogs <myguidedogis@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 12/1/2015 18:31 (GMT-06:00)
To: iotalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [IOTAList] Re: WAS: Candidate discussions IS: Voting
Well, I know of only one agency in the States. It is, I believe based in
California and certifies guide dog trainers. If you are not certified by
them, you can’t work at a school in California or work outside California
such as the trainers at GDF in long Island NY.
