Don Yearwood, President – Ohio Association of Cosmetology Schools (OACS)
125 E. Second St., Dayton, OH 45402
PH: 937-271-1479
RE: Opposition to HB 227
January 12, 2016
Dear Chairman Brown, Vice Chairman Representative Blessing, Ranking member Representative Clyde and
members of the House Government Oversight and Accountability Committee,
As President of the Ohio Association of Cosmetology Schools, I am writing in Opposition to HB 227. I
have been an accredited school owner for 33 years. I operate five schools located in Dayton, Springfield,
Middletown, Huber Heights and Kettering. I have served as the President of the State association for 16 years.
Our association has been in existence for over 60 years. I am also the Immediate Past President of the
American Association of Cosmetology Schools.
The legislation failed to include the industry for Suggestions and Feedback. The legislation does
not incorporate the years of study and feedback from industry advisory groups and coalition members
that worked over the last few years on the major topics. HB 227/SB 213 is premature. It creates a structure
where there would be an obvious lack of standards and no oversight in segments of the Cosmetology
industry that could be a dangerous precedent to the state and nationally.
1.
Some of the major flaws in the legislation include the following:
Manager’s License changed to “Advanced License”
a. This is not simply a name change. The US Department of Education and the National Accrediting
Commission of Career Arts & Sciences have criteria on what constitutes an existing and new program.
As presented in this legislation, Advanced License could be construed as a New Program that would
likely result in the requirement by Accreditation Agencies and the US Department of Education to do
Market Studies and pay to have the course reaccredited with a delay in the course offering. This
would create a delay in current and future students trying to enter the industry.
b. Do not confuse the term “manager’s license” by title, but look at the duties and responsibility of the
“manager’s licensed” cosmetologist who has a higher skill set via additional training to address issues
of error, damage, or danger to clients based on what services are being performed on the client. We
are not talking about manager of your HR department, accounting or running your office – any salon
and business can hire whoever they want to run their day to day financial operations which can be
done now. Nothing in current law prevents someone from managing a person’s business.
c. This bill fails to consider the Manager’s License Advisory Committee agreed upon language at the
State Board of Cosmetology that proposed to modify language to minimize issues to salons operating
a second shift and maintained the integrity of the Managers License to ensure a level of safety for
clients. Language agreed upon would create an option for Salons with second shifts to have a
manager’s licensed cosmetologist available off-site via telephone who could be available to address
immediate needs that arise. This was modeled after on-site / off-site supervision similar to that used in
health care professions. Managers License functions and duties include advanced training that
enables those with the higher skill set to be trained to trouble shoot errors or issues that need
addressed immediately to prevent damage or danger to a client.
d. The Legislation calls for 6-month Apprenticeship to work unsupervised (Does not apply to Boutique
Services). (Line 1756) This provision creates an inequity between Boutique Service providers and
regular licensees. Some Salons have non-compete clauses for their employees. If all
cosmetologists were required to complete an apprenticeship before working on their own, many
cosmetologists would lose the opportunity to become their own small business owner, or become an
independent contractor cosmetologist who can work solo after obtaining their Manager’s License
Cosmetology schooling. The largest segment growing in this industry are individuals who want to
have their own clients, set their own hours of work and become small business owners in charge of
their own destiny and careers. The unintended consequences of forcing this segment of the
population to go work in an apprenticeship under salons which mostly have non-compete
agreements is a major barrier and hindrance to young promising careers and businesses. This
legislation empowers large salons and moves toward creating a monopoly type environment
for larger salons by putting up barriers to competition by new small mom & pop and
independent cosmetologist entrants to the Cosmetology Industry.
e. The legislation makes all disciplines within the various services of cosmetology the same number of
hours – 100 Hours. Curriculum for all disciplines is significantly different although the test is the same
for all disciplines.
f. 100 Hours (Advanced) for the Cosmetology Program is barely over 2 weeks for a Full-Time Student. It
would be practically impossible to put together a 3 discipline class, covering the multiple topics for
such a limited time period. Thereby, making the program unteachable. This could have a major impact
on an Independent Contractor (I/C) being able to obtain I/C licensure. Many of these Independent
Contractors are small businesses and which have seen significant growth over the years.
g. Myth that 300 hours for “manager’s license” is burden to students. 300 hours equates to about $380
dollars at some schools for the manager’s license add-on program providing the additional training
which enables students upon graduation to become sole proprietors, or to open their own business
enabling them to set their own hours, set their own prices, set their own goals. These newly graduated
and current manager’s licensed cosmetologists can choose to open a business and work when they
have clients scheduled enabling them to work, earn a living, take their kids to school in the morning,
pick their kids up after school, set their own hours based on their career dreams. The dream of being
your own boss. Not everyone fits into the big salon business model. Empowering students to choose
the career and job of dreams. Creating small businesses which are the backbone of Ohio is a positive
which the manager’s license cosmetology program is all about. Don’t set an industry backwards by
taking away their opportunities.
2. Addition of Boutique Services
a. The Legislation basically creates a setting in which there would be little to no oversight of segments
of the Cosmetology and Esthetics license.
b. It takes away the authority of the Ohio Legislature regarding determination of services and gives the
authority to the Board (Line 440). Very concerning that the State Legislature would give their powers to
a Board or Commission without input.
c. The Legislation allows for Registration with no education. No Licensure may have state and
national implications in which small business servicers may be unable to obtain professional
liability insurance thereby putting their clients at risk. Some insurance companies who provide
insurance in the industry may no longer offer coverage. The Legislation may not even require for the
registrant to be tested on the approval. In the absence of a clear framework of licensing and
educational requirements, insurers have indicated they will be less inclined to extend coverage in
Ohio.
3. Instructors Examination
a. The Legislation has no provision for Work Permit in the school until the exam is taken. All other
disciplines allow this provision. This was discussed at the board level as well and the consensus was
to allow for a 6-month window to prevent a burden on hiring instructors.
b. Standards by the Department of Education and approved by the Board (Line 1659)
i. What are these standards? There are no defined standards noted.
ii. Ohio has tremendous pass rates. There appears to be no indication or necessity for this type of
change.
4. Reports to the Governor (Line 813)
a. The Legislation creates new reporting requirements on areas including types of public and private
schools, costs to attend public and private schools, loan default rates, pass rates, numbers on new
and renewals and more. Does this fall within the scope of the State Board of Cosmetology? The
language seems targeted, very intrusive and levied toward private schools. However, there is very little
reporting required by Salons.
5. Board may delegate any of the duties listed… to the Executive Director or an individual designated by
the Executive Director. (Line 804)
a. This is very concerning. It does not define the purpose of the delegation or the qualification of the
individuals designated with the duties.
In closing, there are many areas in the legislation that will have unintended consequences to a
thriving and growing industry. There are few industries that touch so many people daily, weekly, monthly.
We are talking about clients who trust in the level of skills including safety, sanitation and Cosmetology
subfields that when clients go to a Cosmetologist who is a schooled and licensed graduate in the profession
of Cosmetology who will be working with hair, skin tissue, chemicals, instruments close to the skin, eyes,
nose, mouth and more, that those Cosmetologists are properly trained and licensed. Our association is
OPPOSED to HB 227. I would be happy to meet with you to discuss the legislation.
Respectfully,
Ohio Association of Cosmetology Schools
Don Yearwood
President
January 12, 2016
To:
Representative Brown
From: Don Yearwood
Ohio Association of Cosmetology Schools
937-271-1479
dfy1214@aol.com
REF:
Comments based on a recent Interested Party Meeting
NECESSITY OF A MANAGER IN SALONS
In an effort to reduce the operational burden regarding the “Necessity of a Manager in Salons” we could agree to
remove this requirement. The removal of the requirement would give the salons the option of hiring a Managing
Cosmetologist to manage the salon or another qualified individual of their choice. We still believe the enhanced skill set
of the Managing Cosmetologist to be important but removing the necessity will allow the salons options from an
operational standpoint.
MAINTAIN OPTIONS FOR BASIC COSMETOLOGY AND MANAGING COSMETOLOGY
We believe in providing students, schools, and licensees options with regard to selection of a Basic Cosmetology License
at 1500 Clock Hours or a Managing Cosmetology License at 1800 Clock hours (1500 + 300 clock hrs.). Maintaining this
option would not require any restructuring of the existing statutory language (ORC 4713) regarding the 300 hour
Managing Cosmetology License. We would not support an unteachable 100 Hour “One size fits all” approach for an
advanced license in all disciplines. This is not a reasonable concept.
CONTINUE WITH THE TERM MANAGER LICENSE
I concur with Steve Thompson, Independent Contractor representative on the Ohio State Board of Cosmetology, the
term manager, as opposed to advanced, is the much preferred designation.
INSTRUCTOR TESTING
Current Cosmetology Instructor License requirements can be found within ORC 4713.31
Prerequisite: managing Cosmetology License and
2000 hours certified working experience in a salon or
1000 hours of board approved cosmetology instructor training as an apprentice instructor
We believe that the current requirements for Instructors licensure are satisfactory for schools to select qualified
educators. However, we are not opposed to an Instructors Examination with the provision that an individual be allowed
to work under a Work Permit for 6 months until the examination is passed. This provision is already in place with the
other licenses. The development of the examination by the board would create a structure for reference materials and
study curriculum for test preparedness.
Other than the examination, We would not support any additional requirements or standards for Instructors… we do not
believe that with the strong State Board pass rates there is a compelling reason to increase standards at all. The creation
of any unnecessary standards or requirements would only create a financial and time constraint burden on the licensees
wishing to become instructors/educators.
In addition, Accredited Cosmetology School Instructors are currently required to achieve 12 hours of Continuing
Education each year in Teaching Methodology and related subjects.
ANNUAL REPORTING TO THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE
We oppose the language… “Submits to the board on an annual basis the same reporting information required by the
school’s national accrediting body or the United States department of education.”
We believe this is overreaching and would create an unnecessary burden on the schools. Some of the information is
proprietary and would be intrusive in nature. Again, we oppose this information.
LICENSURE OR REGISTRATION OF BRAIDERS AND THREADERS
We still believe that based on the exhaustive research done by the board through advisory groups the licensure at 150
hours is the appropriate action going forward for Braiding and Threading. However, we would consider a reasonable
approach that is more than simple registration. Possibly, an on-line course at the Board level could be considered for the
protection of the public.
Ohio Association of Cosmetology Schools
Don Yearwood
President
dfy1214@aol.com