Requests the Louisiana Board of Barber Examiners and the Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology to work together in evaluating whether the practice of alternative hair design should be regulated by the Louisiana Board of Barber Examiners.
The resolution highlights the necessity of conducting a study to evaluate the feasibility and appropriateness of the regulation transition. This examination is key to determining whether the change would bring potential advantages to stakeholders in the hair design community within Louisiana. If the findings support the shift, it may lead to formal changes in how alternative hair design is regulated at the state level, which could impact training requirements and licensing for practitioners.
Senate Resolution 243, proposed by Senator Barrow, urges the Louisiana Board of Barber Examiners and the Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology to collaboratively assess whether the practice of alternative hair design, commonly referred to as hairbraiding, should fall under the regulatory purview of the Barber Examiners. The bill recognizes that regulations regarding alternative hair design vary significantly across the United States, with about twenty-six states having existing regulations in place. Currently, in Louisiana, such practices are managed by the State Board of Cosmetology.
General sentiment surrounding SR243 appears to be supportive of the intent to explore possible regulatory changes that could better align the state's approach with national standards. Advocates for alternative hair design regulation may find this movement towards a study favorable, as it acknowledges their industry and seeks to potentially improve oversight. However, there remains a cautious sentiment regarding the consequences of shifting regulatory authority, which some might view as an unnecessary complication.
Notable points of contention include discussions on whether the current regulatory framework under the Board of Cosmetology effectively meets the needs of the hair design community. Stakeholders may have differing opinions about which board should be responsible for regulation, as this could lead to different standards and practices across the state. The necessity for a thorough evaluation reflects the complexities involved in regulating a profession that is gaining popularity yet remains distinct in its practices and cultural significance.