Dear Senator:

Assembly bill A3754 which was conditionally vetoed on August 27, 2018, has subsequently been approved again by the assembly without a public hearing or without any input from the very agency that will be responsible for the oversight of the recommended changes and that would be the NJ State Board of Cosmetology and Hairstyling. There are several concerns with some of the conditions in the veto statement and we want the public to have a fair opportunity to be heard on this bill and the proposed amendments to the original.  Please do not vote to approve this bill without hearing from the public in every district.

It seems as if this bill is once again with the dubious edits is being steamrolled through the state assembly with no regard for the impact that it will have on the consumers, business community and professional barbers, hairstylist, cosmetologist and braiders in the future. We should be promoting higher education that is what a professional license requires, a high school diploma or an equivalent and specific coursework and examinations for state licensure. There is nothing wrong with that. Why doesn't anyone want to really look at this issue seriously?

It is my hope that unlike the Assembly members, you and the other Senate members will at the very least hear from the members of the state board of cosmetology and hold public hearings before you sanction these conditions that will set precedence for the personal care industry here in the state of New Jersey.
Here are some of my observations from the meeting of the state board of cosmetology on Tuesday, September 11, 2018.

In the conditional veto, Governor Murphy has asked to have two additional positions added to the board and those appointed shall be “ braiders”. It should be noted that all cosmetologist and hairdressers are taught braiding and provide hair braiding services, thus, they are braiders. so the condition should allow for someone who holds either of those licenses to be eligible for a seat on the board. The thought that there will be special seats on the board of Cosmetology for a select group when there will be seven licenses is interesting and unwarranted. It also seems a bit discriminatory. It is my opinion that adding members is a great idea and they should simply be two additional professionals with no special endorsement. By singling out braiders what will happen to representation for manicurists and estheticians who will perhaps feel that they are not totally represented on the board and demand another seat be added? This is a condition that needs to be revisited and amended to allow for two additional professionals with any of the 7 licenses. 

Next, let’s discuss the proposed education hours of 40 or 50 in the conditional veto. I have taken the prerequisites from Chapter 28 of the state board of cosmetology and made some amendments and removed what a natural hair care specialist would not need to learn in my opinion. To be successful in the industry while still protecting the consumer there is a need for theory lessons as well as practical applications notwithstanding one's familiarity with some components of hair styling. There is no conceivable way that anyone could learn what they should know and be successful and provide safe and quality services to the public without classroom education and practice. I have outlined what I think is vital and this is from the perspective of a business professional and an educator. It should be noted that when a student has satisfied half of his or her classroom hours, they are granted a student permit which allows them to work in a salon/shop. This means that in less than four months anyone who is enrolled in the course would be able to work. The claim that school is burdensome is preposterous. The cost of the course would commiserate with the course offerings and there are a great many public institutions who offer cosmetology/hairstyling and soon braiding courses at very low costs and free in public schools. 350 hour course would include the following:
State board rules, regulations 10 hours of theory, Decontamination- Infection control 15 of theory and 10 hours of practical, History of Braiding-Professional image/Salon Business 10 hours of theory,
Hair care product chemistry 10 of theory, Shampooing and Temp Rinse 20 hours of theory and 50
Of practical, Hair and Scalp - Disorder/treatment – Consultation 15 theory and 20 hours practical,Basic cuts- Natural and Artificial 20 theory and 40 hours practical and Hairstyling including braids, locs, weave, 30 theory and 100 hours practical. At the public meeting, the board proposed a curriculum of no less than 250 hours I would agree with that as well.

What is disheartening about this entire situation is that the members of the general assembly had their first and second reading on the same day as the veto!  They could not postpone their vote for two weeks to allow for feedback from the state board members before they so hastily concurred with the conditions in the veto. We should not be favoring one group over others. What if a manicurist says, they will not perform waxing or nail overlays and will only do pedicures? Will they petition politicians for an exemption in the future for a pedicurist license? There is nothing wrong with learning more than the basics and traditions do not expound on all the very crucial areas that one should understand when working as a braider, hairstylist, barber, or cosmetologist. 250 educational hours should be the minimum for a natural hair stylist.

Hair care is a profession and as such the licensees should be proud of their education and not run from it. Licenses should continue their education and be proud and not seek to circumvent the system for the sake of a few who claim superiority due to prior exposure to the art of hair designing through family tradition. Traditionally, mothers teach their children to cook, that does not make one a chef. Traditionally fathers teach their children to change a car’s tire and change the oil, that does not make one a mechanic. People who have chosen this profession at an early age or as a second career deserve to be regarded as professionals.

Lastly, in the conditions, there is a specification that will allow for braiders to house a shop in their residence. We should not be promoting kitchen beauticians. I believe strongly that this condition should be removed and anyone who wants to operate a shop of any sort must follow the current state board rules and regulations as well as the local zoning laws.

I am passionate about this as are the others who have taken the time to sign this petition.  It can not be stressed enough how essential it is for there to be discussion regarding these matters by the members of the state Senate before any votes are cast. Please do not ignore the members of the public but allow our views to be heard and at the very least listen to the recommendations of the women and men who represent the general public as members of the state board of cosmetology regarding the conditions proposed in A3754.

 Sincerely,

Councilwoman Rhashonna C. Cosby, Et Al