I was going to tell you an entirely anecdotal story, then I got sidetracked, then I got irritated, so I decided to live up to the blog title and RANT instead.
Here in California — and I’ve probably gone into this before — “mobile” salons are legal. However — and here’s where they get ya — they don’t mean mobile salon the way that most of us interpret it. They mean more like, you could appropriately outfit a motorhome, drive it to some convenient location and Tweet your GPS coordinates out to your followers. I mean, I guess that’s what you’re supposed to do; it seems the most useful scenario for the type of “mobile salon” that you can operate here. Services have to take place inside the “salon.”
But this is California. Home of Hollywood. You really think all those “celebrity” hairstylists and nail techs and makeup artists working on sets of TV shows, movies, plays, and photo shoots are working for free?
Well, if not, then where’s their citation for unlicensed activity for working outside of a licensed establishment?
That means all that show biz stuff is unlicensed activity. It means no pamper pedi princess parties at anyone’s home. It means no on-site wedding services. Just about a zillion examples of cases where real licensees really work outside of the salon — and have since the dawn of the industry.
I just don’t understand some things. It seems to me that doing an in-home pedi party for a baby shower should fall under “brilliant marketing ideas” and that a properly licensed professional should be able to set up temporary shop for that situation.
If a Mary Kay rep wanted to do demos of manicure products at a home party, that would be OK, as long as she didn’t charge for the services; the manis are demonstrations, the money comes from the sales of products. But if I — a licensee of the State Board — did manis at that same party and got paid for them, then I would be in violation.
Huh? How does that make sense? How does that coincide with the philosophy behind licensing our industry? Really? The Mary Kay lady can do a manicure without any formal training or licensing and it’s totally OK and safe to do in someone’s home...but the trained and licensed professional is somehow endangering the health of the clients under the same circumstances? Just because she got paid for the service?
I fail to see how getting paid for services is an accurate barometer of health, safety, and competence.
Photo courtesy of Nail Taxi
| posted on Friday, September 06, 2013 11:38 AM