posted on: 01/23/2025
Don't let untrained and unlicensed individuals undercut your professional hair services! Speak up and send a letter to your representatives informing them of the dangers of House Bill 3483 and how the bill devalues your education and professional license. When writing to your elected officials, feel free to draw inspiration from AHP's letter of opposition below and use your own personal experiences to make a compelling story. Let's advocate for the hair pro industry together!
AHP's Letter Of Opposition
Associated Skin Care Professionals, Associated Hair Professionals, and Associated Nail Professionals (the Associations) provide professional liability insurance, business resources, professional publications, and legislative and regulatory advocacy for more than 48,000 members nationwide.
The Associations are responding to House Bill 3483 (HB 3483), which seeks to exempt a niche beauty service from licensing requirements in South Carolina. We are strongly opposed to this bill—deregulating blow-dry styling poses negative consequences, including causing permanent hair and/or scalp damage, decreasing public safety, and undercutting licensed cosmetologists. In addition, deregulating this service is contrary to recent legislative trends.
First, let’s address service safety and liability concerns. HB 3483 defines blow-dry styling as: “The practice of shampooing, conditioning, drying, arranging, curling, straightening, or styling hair using only mechanical devices, hair sprays and topical agents, such as balms, oils, and serums. It includes the use and styling of hair extensions, hair pieces, and wigs.” If you exempt blow-dry styling, unlicensed individuals would be allowed to perform the above services on the public without formal, technical training. Although the definition does not allow the use of chemicals, there is still inherent risk.
The fundamental issue is that uneducated persons may permanently damage the hair follicle, burn off the hair, or even burn a client’s scalp using hot tools. Improper hair extension installation can cause tension, leading to breakage or traction alopecia over time, and low-quality extensions can lead to matting that causes stress to the hair and scalp. Without proper education and licensing, an individual may harm a consumer, both physically and aesthetically. What about disciplinary processes? An unlicensed individual may be practicing without insurance and could leave a harmed consumer with no option for recourse.
Second, it’s important to discuss sanitation and public safety. Licensed hair professionals require strict adherence to proper sanitation and infection-control procedures. In fact, infection control is a major component to cosmetology and hair curriculum, and an uneducated individual may not know proper universal precaution protocols. For example, disinfecting combs and brushes after each client is required to ensure contagious scalp conditions, diseases, or lice are not passed from one client to the next. An unlicensed person may not recognize signs of serious scalp conditions or parasites. State licensing boards require students to pass an extensive examination on this subject to earn a license. In South Carolina, a 1,500-hour cosmetology course requires 75 hours of education in sanitation/disinfection and safety precautions. Moreover, in each subject—for example, scalp and hair care treatments, hair shaping, and hairstyling—safety is included in the curriculum assigned to each.
Last, we must consider the impact on licensed professionals. As mentioned, South Carolina cosmetologists are trained at an approved cosmetology school for 1,500 hours and must pass both a theory and a practical examination. Licensed hair professionals determine their service menu prices accordingly based on their education and experience level. If HB 3483 passes, untrained individuals could undercut the licensed professional by offering services at less expensive rates, providing them an unfair business advantage. This is unjust and devalues the credential earned by the licensee.
The Associations cannot support exempting blow-dry services. HB 3483, while possibly well-intentioned, is a misguided attempt to allow uneducated persons to operate more freely but will ultimately result in dangerous and negative repercussions. Oklahoma recognized the need to carve out the niche beauty service and enacted House Bill 2141 (2024) to create a blow-dry styling certificate. That new law requires an individual to complete instruction in general safety and sanitation, some of which must be dedicated to learning how to use mechanical devices for drying, curling, straightening, or styling hair. This may be an alternative route South Carolina should consider.