Committee Goals and Progress Report for State Affairs Committee
Judy Blanton, Chair
GOAL 1: To monitor state and provincial jurisdiction’s laws and regulations that impact I/O psychologists and work to make these laws and regulations more appropriate and user friendly for I/P psychologists.
We have committee members assigned to monitor US and Canadian jurisdictions and monitor changes or potential changes in licensure on an ongoing basis. These data are summarized on a summary spreadsheet.
In terms of specific state issue that could have major impact on I-O psychologists, the California Governor has recommended the merger of the California Board of Psychology with the Social Work and Marriage and Family Therapy boards to create a large “mental health” board. This is part of a series of mergers of boards that is supposed to save money. This same merger was proposed a couple of years ago but was stopped by a strong lobbying group of psychologists that included a letter from SIOP that objected to be part of a mental health board. We made the point that psychology included more than mental health. It is likely that we will need to be involved with lobbying again. I am closely monitoring this and co-operating with the California Psychological Association.
Dennis Johnson attended the Association of State and Provincial Boards of Psychology and did informal lobbying with the board members from various states and provinces about the needs of I-O psychologists. I have talked to the ED of ASPPB about being on a panel at one of the coming meetings in order to raise our concerns.
GOAL 2: To increase awareness of the Psychologically Healthy Workplace Award in our membership
Announcements in TIP and on our website have been used to increase awareness among our members about the award and to urge their participation.
Anna Erickson, our liaison to PHWA, has also been active in providing guidance and support for this program at the national level.
I have had several conversations with David Ballard of APA who heads the PHWA initiative to discuss how SIOP can be helpful. I specifically talked to Dr. Ballard (who has an MBA as well as a PhD) about our concern for the need to highlight the link between “healthy” behaviors and business outcomes and to give provide greater focus on business outcomes in publications and in the award. He seems to understand the issue and is working to move away from the earlier and narrower emphasis on HR services such as family leave or EAP programs.
I have been working with the California award to improve the method of award selection and was part of a sub-group that has refined the training process for site visitors. These tools will be shared nationally at the next meeting.
To answer questions of members regarding licensure and regulations and assist them in dealing with boards of psychology
The chair (and others as appropriate) continues to be available as resources by email and phone to members who have questions about licensure. We get 3 to 4 queries per month.
To develop a simple guide for students to increase awareness about licensure issues
We want to develop a short pamphlet to be made available on our website with a title such as “An I-O student’s guide to licensure” We have found that many students have no information about issues they might face in licensure or have (even worse) wrong information. Faculty are seldom well informed about these issues so we believe that such a guide is needed. We have delayed this project in order to coordinate it with a similar project that ASPPB is working on. ASPPB has agreed to work with us on this and we expect to be working with them on this in early February.
To keep SIOP aware of issues regarding the President’s Task force for the revision of the APA Model Act for licensure and to assure that the I-O voice is heard in these discussions.
We had hoped to have a “mini-summit” of SIOP leaders in order to discuss the issue of licensure in depth. Unfortunately, this did not occur. We did, however, obtain input from a number of academics and practitioners that was used to develop a second draft of the MLA in December. This is being finalized and will go out for public comment in March. At that time, we need to have SIOP make a formal response to the document. The goal is to have the ACT to APA Council in fall 2010.