Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Miserly_Bastard t1_ja5wwi9 wrote

There's nothing wrong with having occupational licensing for things like hair dressing. Hair dressers should know what lice are. They should know how chemical products can and can't be used. They could just read a book or watch a video and then take a test instead of spending thousands of dollars and many months of their lives to obtain a credential.

But let's say that a nail technician doesn't know about the importance of humidity control in their work environment in order for the paint to adhere. Them sucking at their job is not going to hurt anybody. A goodly number of licensed nail techs know this and...simply don't care. Humidity isn't regulated.

Another set of regulations that could be dialed back have to do with building codes for these types of service providers. They ought to be able to operate out of a van or even on a sidewalk if customers are down for that. You shouldn't have to be able to pony up for a commercial buildout with huge overhead costs in order to have your own business.

1

KittyKat122 t1_ja6z770 wrote

Hard disagree. Barbers/hair dressers and nail techs need to learn about and be able to demonstrate sanitation between customers. Also you can hurt people if you don't know how use clippers or a straight razer correctly. You could hurt customers if you don't know how to properly mix or use hair dyes and bleaches. You can hurt customers if the nail tech doesn't know how to properly apply nails.

In addition regulations on business buildings for salons is necessary as they usually have equipment that have high voltage needs/water needs. If you don't have the proper outlets and water hookups you could hurt customers by short circuits and/or cause fires.

9

Miserly_Bastard t1_ja7m366 wrote

Yeah...so get them to demonstrate their basic skills in a test and/or Zoom meeting. Anything that requires expensive equipment can be done at a testing center and could be one level up from the basic license.

But at the end of the day, if you're only clipping hair or only doing nails or only braiding, you just don't need an expensive time-consuming license to start working. You don't need more than a deep-cycle battery and inverter for your equipment.

1

KittyKat122 t1_ja9lq2c wrote

Again, I disagree. I don't think the license should be expensive, but having making it a test to get a license is a good idea. I'm pretty sure you don't need to take any training as long as you can pass the tests. If licensing is removed, anyone can claim they can perform those tasks without the knowledge and if they don't know how the consumer gets harmed. Without regulations how does one know to learn what is needed and what isn't needed for their equipment? There are plenty of people that do hair and nails from their house without licenses, but I'm not going there.

1

Miserly_Bastard t1_jaa7yg1 wrote

I'll go there. My ex-wife worked without a license for a long time and bribed a school to forge hours. That way she could go straight to the test and wouldn't have to do the six months and thousands of dollars.

She worked for various businesses in various states. They all tolerated this as well as other stuff like working without a green card and keeping multiple sets of books in order to cheat taxes. Business owners themselves would routinely cut corners with regard to hygiene. They occasionally got caught but the fines were a slap on the wrist that did not prevent the behavior. Businesses being closed for health or occupational violations were very rare.

In short, it was all a farce.

What I'd have preferred to see is less onerous schooling for law-abiding people and better and stricter enforcement all around. Registration fees could be higher in order for better enforcement to exist, and in such a way they would be able to chase bad actors out of the market as well as protect consumers.

As someone who has a very different occupational license, I would also complain that the people who write licensing tests are themselves unlicensed. If they are going to turn my licensing process into a guessing game about whether I should answer the words on paper or the thoughts that are inferred to be going on in their heads, then the process is broken. Let me assure you: it's very broken.

1

daedalus_was_right t1_ja6gvzo wrote

>or even on a sidewalk

Uh, no. The sidewalk is not a place for people to conduct business, it's a path of travel. Don't push pedestrians into the street, forcing them to risk being struck by cars because you want to cut hair on the sidewalk.

7

Miserly_Bastard t1_ja7k0o0 wrote

Fine, fine, some sidewalks but not others. I'm thinking of the model for hot dog vendors, newspaper stands, and shoe shining in the days of yore. Those spaces were designated and leased.

1

tildenpark OP t1_ja5yuh4 wrote

Point taken. Additionally, there are also differences in licensing across states. Having a hair stylist license in one state doesn’t automatically let you work in a neighboring state.

2

Rhueh t1_jadeo8k wrote

>You shouldn't have to be able to pony up for a commercial buildout with huge overhead costs in order to have your own business.

It can be even more ridiculous than that, sometimes. A friend of mine started a food-related business that required him to install stainless steel plumbing in his rented commercial space. Fair enough. But he then discovered that tenancy regulations prevented the landlord from "upgrading" only one unit. So, my friend had to pay to to have stainless steel plumbing installed in all the units (a six-figure expense) even though none of the other businesses required or even wanted it.

1