Tag: hair salons

Independent workers: When do we get unemployment?

Hair dressers, gig drivers, landscapers, freelancers and other independent contractors who work for themselves normally don’t qualify for unemployment benefits.  But these aren’t normal times.

The $2 trillion government stimulus program is supposed to finally give unemployment benefits for millions of self-employed people who do not pay into the unemployment compensation system as full-time employees do.  However, many of them are growing more nervous by the day as they wonder when they will see the money.  Laura Grant, like many people on furlough right now, is desperately trying to reach her state’s unemployment hotline to learn if she now qualifies for benefits. Grant is a hair stylist who manages a six-person salon called Beneath the Crown in Florence, Kentucky. All the employees are independent contractors who rent booths. She’s had no luck reaching a live person in Kentucky’s unemployment office. Every time she calls, thousands of other people are trying to do the same.  Hair salon workers, freelancers waiting for stimulus aid.

Laura Grant, like many people on furlough right now, is desperately trying to reach her state’s unemployment hotline to learn if she now qualifies for benefits.  Grant is a hair stylist who manages a six-person salon called Beneath the Crown in Florence, Kentucky. All the employees are independent contractors who rent booths.  She’s had no luck reaching a live person in Kentucky’s unemployment office. Every time she calls, thousands of other people are trying to do the same. She and her fellow stylists have tried filing online for unemployment benefits but have had no luck because they have no “employer.”  “I was able to fill it out, but in the employer section, I had to put ‘self employed,’ so it denied me,” she said. President Trump and state leaders have announced that the stimulus package specifically provides benefits for self-employed and gig workers, but these hair stylists and millions of other workers like them have yet to see it.  Workers at Beneath the Crown are praying it happens. Until it does, they’ll be facing down looming bills without any way to pay.  “It’s been two weeks and I haven’t had any income,” Grant said. “We all have car payments. There are a couple of single moms who work here, so we are all up in the air and we don’t know what to do.”

Kentucky’s unemployment office says self-employed workers should fill out the online forms anyway, and the state government will “fix the issue at the back end” when the federal money comes through. Other states are also telling independent workers to file, even if the form rejects them at this point.  Grant hopes it happens soon. In the meantime, she’s trying to live by the message in her lobby: “Think positive and positive things will happen.

Beauty Business Report 2018 – Cost & Trends

At first blush, the beauty industry could be thought to cater only to the glamorous, or perhaps the vain, or maybe just those in the spotlight. And it does – along with everyone else! The industry is built on the product and services that help us look our best – whatever that best may be. It’s more diverse than you think and it’s certainly not just the makeup, hair color and perfume – it’s also the deodorant, toothpaste and even the ear hair clippers. It’s not just the salons – it’s the barber shops, waxing franchises, massage franchises and a whole lot more. It is every product and service dedicated to helping us look – and smell – the way we want, or the way we believe we should for professional reasons. And our definition of beauty is malleable and ever changing – providing never ending opportunities for the industry to innovate.

Historically trends were driven by celebrity taste-makers through their personal choices or professional endorsements. Those days are gone, or nearly so. 82% of women now believe that social media drives these trends. It’s a constant flow of information and opinion from not just trendsetters or celebrities, but from friends and friends of friends and an entire universe of strangers. But however they are set, there is a large industry ready, willing and able to cater to them. It is resistant to economic downturns and poised for even more growth. For the entrepreneur there are plentiful representative sales opportunities within companies like Avon or Arbonne and many more traditional franchising opportunities providing a slew of services.

As it turns out, it takes a lot of effort to keep us looking and smelling our best – an absolute army of products and services, in fact. Cosmetics, skin care, hair styling, hair coloring, hair removal, nail salons, tanning salons, massage parlors and luxury spas, shower and shaving product, perfumes, colognes…and a whole lot more. And that’s where it starts to get interesting – within each of these segments are products for every different skin tone or texture, allergy, age, hair type or color, sex – even the time of day! It is a level of diversity and nuance that may go unnoticed to the casual observer. Some of us, in fact, are overwhelmed by all those rows of shaving cream. But increasingly we are the minority – most consumers care, are discerning, and will try a number of different products before finding something that works. Once they find it, however, brand loyalty – whether for a shampoo or a particular salon – is extremely strong.

Producers differentiate themselves through their target demographic markets, price point and with different manufacturing processes. Products that promise no animal testing or that are all natural, for example, have loyal, niche markets and can often charge a premium.

Service providers compete primarily through price, location as well as their target demographic markets. Types of service and the related products that are offered are vital to profitability. Hair salons and barber shops, for example, rely on 5-15% of their revenue from hair care product sales. The beauty industry is known to be resistant to economic downturns – even faring well during the Great Recession of 2008. Though consumers tend to be more price conscious during those times, they do not stop spending. So in today’s environment of rising per capita incomes the beauty business is booming. In 2015 the industry generated $56.2 billion in the United States. Hair care is the largest segment with 86,000 locations. Skin care is a close second and growing fast, expected to have revenue of almost $11 billion by 2018. This growth is being driven in part by a generally increasing awareness of the importance of skin care, but also specifically due to an increase in the market for men.

 

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are nearly one million people employed in the primary service segments of the market, and there are strong growth expectations. Clearly this is an industry on the rise:

  • Barbers, hairdressers and cosmetologists: 656,000 in 2014, 10% expected growth by 2024.
  • Manicurists and pedicurists: 113,600 in 2014, 10% expected growth by 2024.
  • Skincare specialists: 55,000 in 2014 with a 12% expected growth by 2024. Specific growth expected for businesses serving men.
  • Massage therapists: 168,800 employed in 2014 with a whopping 22% growth by 2024!
  • Organic products & products produced in a sustainable (environmentally conscious) manner. Certainly a niche market for many years, but greater availability of information about the benefits – personal or global – are driving increased growth.
  • Products and services focused on our aging population. Said plainly – we have a large retired/retiring population, and many of them have money to spend.
  • Products and services focused on babies and young children. This is frequently related to the organic/sustainable movement above. In particular, millennial moms are willing to pay a premium to make sure their kids have the proper skin protection. Other franchises such as Cookie Cutters focus on providing an amazing experience for kids – turning a trip to get the tips trimmed into an adventure.
  • Men’s product and services – this trend is still relatively new but is expected to drive growth for years to come. Places like the Boardroom Salon claim to provide the ultimate relaxation experience for men while the Hair Saloon and 18/8 Men’s Hair Salon are reinventing the barbershop.And it is just the tip of the iceberg.It is estimated that 75% of men are not using any sort of facial skin care, but interest continues to grow.

As mentioned above, it’s important to remember that many beauty franchises derive up to 15% of their revenue from product sales; putting the right product on the shelves can make or break a business. Some manufacturers have a franchising distribution system of their own and even offer training programs, or partner with a particular service provider. With strong and growing demand, employment estimates through the roof to meet that demand and a strong history of being a steady business even in turbulent times, the beauty industry continues to provide fantastic opportunities.

 

 

 

Real Hair Truth Cosmetic/Beauty Product Injury Lawsuits

the real hair truth

Injuries from cosmetic products can come in a wide variety of forms — from allergic reactions to infections and other complications. There are two main legal theories that a person injured by a cosmetic product (the plaintiff) could sue under: product liability and breach of warranty. This article discusses what a plaintiff in a cosmetic injury suit must prove under either theory, cases specifically related to allergic reactions, and the possibility of class action lawsuits.

Product Liability: The Basics

The most likely theory to be used in a lawsuit involving cosmetic product injuries is product liability. An injured plaintiff can sue both the manufacturer and/or the seller (the defendant) of the cosmetic product if his or her injury was caused by a defect, a defective design or improper labeling. Most states follow what is called the “strict product liability” rule, although a few still use traditional negligence rules.

A plaintiff suing under a strict liability theory simply needs to prove:

  • that he or she was the kind of consumer that the defendant intended to use the product
  • that the defect did not occur after the product was sold, and
  • that the plaintiff was injured.

This kind of theory is called “strict liability” because many of the requirements in a standard negligence case, like proof of a specific duty of care owed to the plaintiff, are not included. Most states adopted strict liability for mass-marketed consumer products because, among other things, the manufacturers needed to be financially responsible for their products, and not be allowed to escape liability simply because of the difficulty plaintiffs faced trying to prove negligence claims.

In a negligence case (in those few states that still use this theory for consumer products), the plaintiff will need to prove:

  • that he or she bought the product from the defendant
  • that the defendant should have known that the product could be dangerous if unaccompanied by proper warnings, or that the product had a defect
  • that the failure to warn the plaintiff, or the defect or defective design, injured the plaintiff, and
  • that the plaintiff didn’t do anything to cause the injury.

Breach of Warranty

A cosmetic product injury case based on a breach of warranty theory will be the same as other standard breach of warranty cases.

An injured plaintiff could sue for breach of an express warranty if the seller or manufacturer made specific guarantees that a product would have specific effects that the product did not have (note that this theory might not fit with most cases involving an actual injury).

The plaintiff could also sue for breach of an implied warranty that the cosmetic product was fit for normal use, i.e. the implied guarantee that no normal cosmetic product would cause an injury if used properly.

Finally, the plaintiff could sue for breach of an implied warranty that the product was fit for a specific purpose, i.e. that the defendant knew the plaintiff wanted to use the product for a specific purpose, but the product caused an injury when the plaintiff tried use it.

There are many state and federal laws controlling breach of warranty claims. Some breach of warranty claims may not be appropriate when the plaintiff is suing for physical injuries, if the law only allows compensation for the money lost on the product (what is called “economic damages”).

Some warranty laws, however, do allow a plaintiff to sue for physical injuries. Perhaps more importantly, proving a breach of warranty can help prove a strict liability or negligence claim. A plaintiff is not limited to suing under one theory, so including a breach of warranty claim in a cosmetic injury lawsuit will generally help a plaintiff’s case overall.

Injuries Caused by Allergies

If a manufacturer knows, or should know, that a product might cause an allergic reaction in some people, injured plaintiffs could potentially sue the manufacturer for failing to warn about the allergic reaction under a strict liability or negligence theory. A breach of warranty theory might also be possible if the allergic reaction is not extremely rare, i.e. the product was not fit for cosmetic use because some percentage of the population was allergic.

Class Actions for Cosmetic Product Injuries

If a cosmetic product causes many or all of its users the same kind of injury, then a class action may be possible. In a class action case, multiple plaintiffs with the same kind of injury from the same source sue the defendant in one lawsuit.

If someone is injured by a cosmetic product, they or their attorney should research whether there is already a class action case or a settlement fund for people injured by the product. Often, even though the case has settled, there will be a fund to pay those who were not a part of the original case.

Real Hair Truth what makes a cosmetic misbranded?

The Beautiful Lies

The film “Beautiful Lies” release date will be in 2014

In our beautiful world cosmetics hold a strong life in the world of personnel beauty. According to the U.S Government this is a definition of what is “Misbranded”.  Realize my friends that in this day and age government is in everything you do, and with the past and current behavior of the U.S Government would you even take there word on just about anything. Politicians cannot even agree on anything anymore, there life span as a senator, congressman, house representative is for life. Your freedom of speech is going down the drain. So why would you take the word of the FDA. According to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), its responsibilities include “protecting the public health by assuring that foods, cosmetics are safe, wholesome, sanitary and properly labeled.” This responsibility entails regulating a large number of companies producing this nation’s food, making appointments to the high-level positions within the agency very important.  Most high-level FDA employees have a background in either medicine or law, but one of the largest private-sector sources is the Monsanto Company. Over the past decades, at least seven high-ranking employees in the FDA have an employment history with the Monsanto Company.

Well aware of its accused ‘revolving door’ connection with the FDA and other government agencies, Monsanto has issued several press releases denying collusion with the government. In fact, it posted on its official website that collusion theories relating to these agencies, including the FDA, “ignore the simple truth that people regularly change jobs to find positions that match their experience, skills and interests.  ”

Monsanto’s statements help shed light on the balancing act regularly occurring on Capitol Hill when appointments to these top agency positions arise. The importance of the food, cosmetic industrys cannot be overstated and, therefore, the pending question remains: Do Americans want industry insiders regulating it, or those from the academic realm?

What makes a cosmetic misbranded?

Section 602 of the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. 362] describes what causes a cosmetic to be considered misbranded:

“A cosmetic shall be deemed to be misbranded–

  • (a) If its labeling is false or misleading in any particular.
  • (b) If in package form unless it bears a label containing (1) the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor; and (2) an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents in terms of weight, measure, or numerical count: Provided, That under clause (2) of this paragraph reasonable variations shall be permitted, and exemptions as to small packages shall be established, by regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
  • (c) If any word, statement, or other information required by or under authority of this Act to appear on the label or labeling is not prominently placed thereon with such conspicuousness (as compared with other words, statements, designs, or devices in the labeling) and in such terms as to render it likely to be read and understood by the ordinary individual under customary conditions of purchase and use.
  • (d) If its container is so made, formed, or filled as to be misleading.
  • (e) If it is a color additive, unless its packaging and labeling are in conformity with such packaging and labeling requirements, applicable to such color additive, as may be contained in regulations issued under section 721. This paragraph shall not apply to packages of color additives which, with respect to their use for cosmetics, are marketed and intended for use only in or on hair dyes (as defined in the last sentence of section 601(a)).
  • (f) If its packaging or labeling is in violation of an applicable regulation issued pursuant to section 3 or 4 of the Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970.

Note that under the FD&C Act, the term “misbranding” applies to–

  • False or misleading information,*
  • Lack of required information,
  • Conspicuousness and readability of required information,
  • Misleading packaging,
  • Improper packaging and labeling of color additives, and
  • Deficiencies where the Poison Prevention Packaging Act requires special packaging.

*Note: According to the FD&C Act, a determination that labeling is “misleading” includes considering both what the label says and what it fails to reveal:

“If an article is alleged to be misbranded because the labeling or advertising is misleading, then in determining whether the labeling or advertising is misleading there shall be taken into account (among other things) not only representations made or suggested by statement, word, design, device, or any combination thereof, but also the extent to which the labeling or advertising fails to reveal facts material in the light of such representations or material with respect to consequences which may result from the use of the article to which the labeling or advertising relates under the conditions of use prescribed in the labeling or advertising thereof or under such conditions of use as are customary or usual” (FD&C Act, sec. 201(n); 21 U.S.C. 321(n)].

In addition, a cosmetic marketed in violation of the FPLA or any regulations issued under its authority is considered misbranded within the meaning of the FD&C Act [15 U.S.C.1456(a)]. For cosmetics offered for sale as consumer commodities, the FPLA–

  • requires further label information, such as the product’s identity [15 U.S.C.1453], and
  • authorizes the implementation of regulations to specify the proper presentation of required label information, require an ingredient declaration, and prevent deceptive packaging [15 U.S.C.1454 (c)]

The FPLA defines a consumer commodity, as it applies to FDA-regulated products, as:

“any food, drug, device, or cosmetic (as those terms are defined by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act …, and any other article, product, or commodity of any kind or class which is customarily produced or distributed for sale through retail sales agencies or instrumentalities for consumption by individuals, or use by individuals for purposes of personal care or in the performance of services ordinarily rendered within the household, and which usually is consumed or expended in the course of such consumption or use.” [15 U.S.C.1459(a)]

Note that the FPLA defines a consumer commodity by the way it is marketed, not the way it is labeled. Labeling a product with words such as “For Professional Use Only” does not keep your product from being considered a consumer commodity under the FPLA.

Labeling regulations are very complex. Detailed information on cosmetic labeling is available in FDA’s Cosmetic Labeling Manual and the labeling regulations themselves [21 CFR 701].

2013 In Review For the Real Hair Truth Organization/Jotovi Designs Inc

TheRealHairTruthLogo (1)mediumsize

The blog (The Real Hair Truth)/organization (Jotovi Designs) did well this past year.  The “TRUTHFUL”  voice for the industry will always be here on this page. The truth of the industry will always be written and told by me. Even though you will not find it in Modern Salon, PBA, Salon Galaxy,  Hairbrained.me, ETC.  And my films will voice the truth of the industry, ‘The Real Hair Truth, The Beautiful Lies”. Thank you everyone for your support the last 7 years. We have did it on our own without the help of industry magazines, websites, or cosmetic brands.

Jotovi Designs Inc.

We have funded our books and films on our own and will continue to do so.  Jotovi Designs Inc. is not looking for any help financially from any beauty/cosmetic industry brands and will continue to do so!  The organization continues to help professionals in the industry and will continue to do so! This year will be the release of the second documentary called “Beautiful Lies”.  I thank everyone for their continued support and may all have a wonderful New Year!

Best Regards

Joseph Kellner

Here’s an excerpt:

The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 19,000 times in 2013. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 7 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.