Hi Jane, I don't think you were asking for the advice I'm about to offer, but I just want to throw something out there. I know that, sometimes, when we personally are in the middle of a situation, it can sometimes be hard to step back and think about things objectively. I'm going to offer something that you might have been able to say to someone else going through the same thing in another state if you were not in the middle of it yourself. If you are perceived to be associated with an effort to get your employer punished, that's dangerous business. Rather than trying to get your employer punished, maybe you could try to push a movement to talk about the merits of informed choice. This would involve talking about the policy itself, but it would also allow you to showcase the benefits of informed choice. Get lots of people thinking about informed choice and why it's so great. Maybe hold an event via Zoom in the NFB of Oklahoma where people all get together to talk about informed choice and why it's so great. Maybe have panelists who come to talk about how informed choice allowed them to access services, like attending LCB, that changed their lives. I know that you know the people in Oklahoma worlds better than I do, but I urge you to think about hammering on the positive attributes of informed choice rather than trying to get your employer punished. Aloha, Justin Salisbury Justin Mark Hideaki Salisbury he/him/his Phone: 808.797.8606 Email:?President at Alumni.ECU.edu LinkedIn:?https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-salisbury ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Justin_Salisbury ? ?Once social change begins, it cannot be reversed. You cannot un-educate the person who has learned to read. You cannot humiliate the person who feels pride. You cannot oppress the people who are not afraid anymore.? Cesar Chavez -----Original Message----- From: Jane Lansaw <widearc2000 at gmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2022 9:47 PM To: Justin Salisbury <PRESIDENT at alumni.ecu.edu> Cc: NOMC Mailing List <NOMC at lists.nbpcb.org> Subject: Re: [Nomc] Looking for RSA federal documentation Thanks Justin, you gave me a good start. Looks like I just needed some good search terms. I googled RSA informed choice and was able to locate POLICY DIRECTIVE RSA-PD-01-03 DATE: January 17, 2001 I guess I need to go back to the rehabilitation act as amended in 1998. I found a lot of things I wanted to hear but I didn?t find any penalties for states that flat refused to follow the regulations. Is it possible RSA could deny an uncooperative state federal funding? Right now it is just a rumor being circulated by one counselor. when I have hard proof in my hand to take to NFB, we will be on it as an affiliate. My state president is on the national board and I?m sure she will get all the assistance we need from the president. Meanwhile, finding RSA teeth might give some people in the agency the idea that they could lose money for this behavior even before the organized blind takes a bite out of them. Thanks for any other information that can lead us in the right direction and I will keep all of you posted as this new Oklahoma soap opera progresses. Jane Lansaw NOMC
On Jan 3, 2022, at 8:19 PM, Justin Salisbury <PRESIDENT at alumni.ecu.edu> wrote:
?Hi Jane,
My expectation is that the federal RSA policy of informed choice is supposed to prevail over state policy. That doesn't mean that they won't try to develop policies contrary to informed choice. That is where the NFB is so important.
Best of luck, and no more NAC!
Justin Salisbury
-----Original Message----- From: NOMC <nomc-bounces at lists.nbpcb.org> On Behalf Of Jane Lansaw Sent: Monday, January 03, 2022 9:04 PM To: NOMC Mailing List <NOMC at lists.nbpcb.org> Subject: [Nomc] Looking for RSA federal documentation
Good evening everyone,
I?m looking for some help here in Oklahoma. I was recently told by a counselor that Oklahoma State policy has recently changed, as in the last 30 some odd days. I was told, with no documentation to back it up, that the new policy is clients will be forced to go to in-state training center unless they can trot out special circumstances that make it advisable for them to go out of state. Oklahoma contracts with seven training centers, six of which are out of state. I want to know if there are any federal regulations or RSA rulings to support our contention that clients should be allowed to choose freely from among those centers contracting with Oklahoma. Can anyone out there help me find these if they exist? I?m hoping that RSA has regulation in place to penalize Oklahoma if such a decision really has been made here.
I haven?t gotten my hands on any proof that state policy has indeed changed but when I do, I will be sending it on to my state NFB leaders. I have a client who is very new to blindness and has not gotten involved with Nfb yet. She is going to help me obtain the proof if it exists. They don?t know what we are planning together and will not suspect her of passing that information on to the consumer groups. I?m sure they are trying to avoid that and that might be why I?m not getting an answer to my query. Everyone knows I will take whatever they send me straight to Jeannie Massey.
And now, for those of you who are fans of horror films like Friday the 13th or Halloween or nightmare on Elm Street, I will tell you this and hope that you sleep better tonight then we are sleeping in Oklahoma. The one training center in state is accredited, cue the scary Music, by NAC!
Thanks for any help you guys have out there in the rest of the country,
Jane Lansaw NOMC _______________________________________________ NOMC mailing list NOMC at lists.nbpcb.org http://lists.nbpcb.org/listinfo.cgi/nomc-nbpcb.org