Big Hair’s House of Cards: It’s about money, not the public interest.

Big Hair’s arguments against allowing hair braiding is like a house of cards, and Big Hair knows it. That’s why they hide behind arguments about “consumer protection.”

Hogwash.

It’s hard to feel any kind of sympathy for Big Hair. Two weeks ago, I posted “Big Hair Strikes Back,” reporting that the Big Hair lobby had booed down state legislator Holly Richardson during a hearing. Richardson was looking to allow a small businesswoman, Jestina Clayton, to braid hair, as she had for decades, without being shut down by the state. Hair doers had showed up en mass and in classy fashion had booed instead of make cogent arguments.

Why? Is hair braiding a threat to public health?  It’s virtually risk free, requires no chemicals, and is nearly untaught at most cosmetology schools.

But that doesn’t stop the Big Hair lobbyists from trying to limit competition. Hair is their domain, and they don’t want competition unless pay your dues first…to them.

Don’t think this is a big deal? Try $18,500 in tuition fees, not to mention free labor from budding young cosmetologists and estheticians. Since Holly Richardson was booed down, already Big Hair is organizing. The week after I wrote my posting, a relative (who also happens to be in a related industry) mentioned that she had received emails inviting estheticians and cosmetologists to the Utah state capital to lobby on the industry’s behalf.

Danny's avatar on his post

Then, on November 3, “Danny” linked my blog while looking for help writing a letter to his state representatives (“Ha, ha, very funny…” he said. Why, thank you, Danny.) and listed out the arguments that Big Hair is making.  Read his comments, but be warned–it seems to be a site designed for people interested in yaoi, which some people may find offensive.

As for his arguments, well, they’re almost laughable:

1. Argument: “when you let people with out a license into salons they aren’t just going to stick to braiding. They are going to shampoo, deep condition, style ( both thermal and updos) hair, wax, and eye lash extensions.”Response:  First of all, what dude knows what a thermal is, let alone an updo? (What is an updo? And a thermal? Serious.)  Further, if you are worried about hair braiders acting outside their license, what weight does a piece of paper have at all?  Won’t these same people act without a license, anyway? Why does forcing hair braiders to attend a school that does not teach hair braiding protect against rogue cosmetologists doing thermals and updos without a license? (hehe…rogue cosmetologists.)

   Why not just allow a business license for hair braiding, revocable upon violation? The cost of school–$20,000 and 3000 hours of training–is overkill for a simple business based on hair braiding, especially when that business only brings in about $4,500 a year (according to Jestina Clayton, the hair braider at issue).

   We’re in a struggling economy, and we’re looking for ways to disincentive business growth, even one that will harm no one…which leads us to Danny’s next point.

2. Argument: “They won’t know anything about how the hair works and the composition of it. If they don’t know what they are doing they can cause some bad infections and diseases and disorders.”Response: Really? Braiding hair can lead to bad infections, diseases and disorders? After watching my mother braid my four sisters’ hair for twenty-five years, I have a hard time swallowing this one.
3. Argument: Something goes wrong and hair falls out. The hair braider “won’t be able to explain what happened properly.”Response: I’m tempted to just ignore this, except…well, this is Big Hair’s argument, so…  Let me get this right–a hair braider who is good enough that people want to pay them money to braid hair won’t be able to explain that “your hair fell out because sometimes, hair does that when it’s braided tight”? So they need to go to school for two years to figure that out?
4. Argument: Hair braiders “wont have the malpractice to back them up if they [get sued]”.Response: I don’t see any reason why an insurance company won’t insure a hair braider if the state of Utah provides a business license. Rep. Richardson isn’t trying to make it a business that doesn’t need a license; she’s just trying to make it a lot easier to get a license. The hair braider will still want to start an LLC, buy insurance, and protect herself. Going to a Big Hair school won’t change that or help her if she gets sued.
5. Summary Argument: “[W]ould you rather have someone do your hair if they just got a certificate that they got with in a day or two or have someone with a license and acutally [sic] studied in it?”
   Response: Newsflash, Danny–most schools don’t spend two years teaching braiding, if they teach it at all and a braider who doesn’t know how to do braids very well isn’t going to have very much business. Let the consumer decide–not Big Hair–who they want to do their hair, and how.

Cosmetology Utah Executive Board Members: Top Row, Norman Headman, Jeanne Rasmussen, Nicole Stuart, Janette Adams; Middle Row: Seh Ho Mendenhall, Shannon Mechling; Bottom Row: Grace Birch, LuJean Tatton, Linda J. Chard

Indeed, what Big Hair is worried about is not consumer protection. It’s their own bottom line.

This is about the protection of Big Hair, the expensive schools they run, and industry they own. Cosmetology school is a big business, and the minute hair dressers don’t have to kowtow to them to style hair, the price of an education will fall.

I’m not advocating the complete deregulation of all cosmetology and esthetics; au contraire. However, requiring a hair braider to attend 2,000 hours of training, 1,000 hours of internship, and pay up to $18,500, all for a $4,500 a year income?

That’s over the top, and it’s not in the public’s interest. But it is money in Big Hair’s pocket. Pull out one card, though, and the house comes tumbling down.

Related articles

• Big Hair Strikes Back: Utah’s Hair Braiding Regulations Fail the Laugh Test. (publiusonline.com)