L’Oreal heiress Liliane Bettencourt dies at age 94

PARIS – Liliane Bettencourt, the L’Oreal cosmetics heiress and the world’s richest woman, has died at her home in a chic Parisian suburb. She was 94.

Bettencourt’s daughter, Francoise Bettencourt Meyers, said in a written statement Thursday that her mother “left peacefully” overnight in Neuilly-sur-Seine.

Liliane Bettencourt was the only child of Eugene Schueller, who founded L’Oreal in the early 20th century. Forbes magazine estimated her fortune to be worth $39.5 billion this year.

L’Oreal Chairman and CEO Jean-Paul Agon expressed “great admiration” for Bettencourt. Agon said she “always looked” after the company and its employees and “she has personally contributed greatly to its success for many years.”

Born in 1922 in Paris, she married French politician Andre Bettencourt at the age of 27. Her husband notably served as a minister at the end of the 1960s and beginning of the 1970s. He died in 2007.

Liliane Bettencourt inherited the L’Oreal fortune upon the death of her father in 1957. When the company went public six years later, she continued to own a majority stake


As the world’s leading beauty company, L’Oreal generated sales amounting to 25.8 billion euros in 2016 and employs 89,300 people worldwide, according to the company.

Bettencourt’s name has been involved in a politico-financial scandal known in France as the “Bettencourt Affair”, which has wound its way through French courts and newspapers for years.

The case stemmed from a 2007 complaint filed by Bettencourt’s daughter accusing one of her mother’s closest friends, the photographer Francois-Marie Banier, of manipulating the elderly widow into giving him artwork and cash.

In 2015, a French court handed Banier a three-year prison sentence on charges of swindling millions of euros from Bettencourt by taking advantage of her weak mental state. The court acquitted a former ally of former President Nicolas Sarkozy in the case.

Sarkozy’s former campaign treasurer, Eric Woerth, was acquitted on charges of “abuse of weakness” and taking donations from Bettencourt during the 2007 presidential election campaign.

Sarkozy himself was cleared in 2013 of preliminary charges.

Bettencourt is survived by her daughter, Francoise, who was born in 1953.

The Norm For The Beauty Industry!

This was from a Facebook article that I joined in and here is the problem.


My name is Joe and I am trying to get some advice for my wife who is way too nice. So a quick run down on the events.

My wife has worked at a spa for approximately 3-4 years before quitting for another spa. She was paid commissions of 50% and also had a $20 a month so call “booth rental”. She files a 1099 and pays all her own taxes. She was always asked to make trips to get products and called in for meetings but never compensated for her time. All products were supplied by the spa.

So upon my wife advising the owner that she was quitting because lack of steady business and comments regarding closing the hair side of the spa down, my wife was advised that she is not to contact any clients and that if she did so, she would take legal action. Please note that there was no contract of any kind signed. So my wife sent out a text and card to all of the clients that she has worked on just saying she had relocated and if they would like to schedule an appointment to please contact her. Apparently one of the clients brought in the card to the old owner and my wife was sent another text saying this is her last warning.

The very next day, one of my wife’s friends/clients that she has been doing for a long time called her to make an appointment and advised that she had received an email from the old salon stating that My wife was no longer employed at the salon and that she is offering all clients a 50% discount off of hair and free partial facial.

I personally feel that this is a low blow seeing how my wife did not stoop to that level and only sent out a card saying she had relocated. Is there anything that can be done to my wife for sending the cards or any advice you can give on how we should respond to the owners threats?

I appreciate everyone’s time and look forward to your responses.

The concerned husband,


These are some of the comments contributed by fellow professionals.

The salon and your wife don’t own clients they get to decide for themselves. The old owner is all bark no bite”

She should count her losses and move on. The clients who are loyal will follow her. It’s useless to fight with unreasonable people and it sounds as though her former employer is clueless. She’s not under a contract so your wife can contact whomever she pleases, the consumer will make a choice.

There was nothing written in contract, and actually, the employer can get in deep trouble for charging rent AND being considered having an employee. You can’t be both. It’s too gray- she was not paying your wife’s employment tax, yet treating her like an employee. Legally, your wife would have been responsible for everything, supplies etc. she charged her rent to get past paying her employees taxes/minimum wage. Of course the owner wanted to try to retain the clients but since there was no non compete….. id tell your wife to tell her former salon that if she doesn’t stop harassing her, she will report them for unfair labor practices.”

All you need to do is tell the old salon owner that you will be filing an SS-8 with the IRS to determine if your wife was in fact an commissions or a booth renter and if it’s found that your wife was an employee, then the salon owner will be responsible for back taxes AND will most likely be fined by the IRS for tax’s. You may share this website for verification to the salon owner so she doesn’t think you aren’t meaning business. Whether you actually do it or not is up to you. It appear as if your wife has been classified and you probably should file. You won’t need a lawyer if you get the IRS involved. You can also file with your state’s labor relations board. They aren’t quite as effective as the IRS, though. This is serious business with the IRS. They do not like to be fooled by the tax payers! As someone who has had to deal with them over an unemployment insurance issue, trust me…they have no mercy! (I’m all legit now! I pleaded no knowledge and they let me get away with it once! I had to pay a pretty stiff fine, though!) Don’t be afraid to let the salon owner know that you aren’t afraid to call the IRS. Quite honestly, your wife should not have had to pay taxes all these years.”


This is the Beauty/Cosmetic Industry. If no contracts were signed she has every right to contact the client. Also the owner has every right also. If the harassment continues from the owner such as the emails stated. Please acquire a cease and desist order against her. And then enjoy your lives. These tactics from the owner are ol school tactics of intimidation. But the owner has every right also just like the employee to keep the business. Since she provide the clients to your loved one. Two way street, this is beauty business and this is how it goes. Its like a whores business, Pimp and Prostitute. It will never change. sir. Primitive industry. Good days, really? It is a lovely craft, but after making 2 documentary’s of the industry. Nothing has changed. Its a free for all. Yes the only way of changing the industry is being a mentor and a role model. Many good MEN and WOMEN are used in this industry. You are really seeing the corporate slavery now. It is hard for all the youngsters coming out to make a living. On the payroll percentages corporations and independent owners are paying. So many professionals I see are taken advantage of. All for GREED, Disgusting.  I don’t see this profession as a viable form of income. Anymore. Unless you are with a Union or the Film/Entertainment Industry. But I love the craft you can always keep learning. I like craft more now since I do makeup and photography and films. You can really learn a lot combining the three crafts. I now just concentrate on the craft. I no longer friend people in the industry. I have found out anyone can be anyone on the internet. So I surround myself with like minded people and stay away from the so called “Stars”.  Internet stars that is! lololol


The Slow Political Destruction Of The Beauty Industry By The Greedy!

California Licensed Estheticians & Consumers OPPOSE SB 296

We, your California Licensed Estheticians, Cosmetologists and California consumers, collectively OPPOSE SB 296, allowing nail techs to perform waxing services on their clients.  We do not oppose pursuing Continuing Education and we welcome anyone to join us by obtaining their license as an esthetician. We hold great concern for California consumers, our clients, and risks to public health that the passing of SB 296 will exacerbate.  The temptation of a quickie brow or other waxing service at the nail shop has caused traumatic injury to the consumers of California way too often. Consumers do not know that it is currently illegal for their nail tech to provide these services.

With the passing of this bill 130,000 licensed nail techs and those licensed while the bill is enacted and put into effect, potentially will be allowed to provide these services legally; without proper training and specific understanding of “how skin works”.In your Strategic Plan, you state that the “DCA protects and serves consumers in many ways, including…. Supporting and advocating for consumer interests BEFORE lawmakers. DCA staff review and analyze proposed legislation and regulations to ensure that consumers are protected.” 

The passing of this bill will only serve to VALIDATE THE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY and injury caused to consumers that 21 overwhelmed BBC inspectors have failed to “catch in the act” thus far. With respect and as your stakeholders AND consumers, we ask that you OPPOSE SB 296 for the greater good of California consumers and California licensees that work diligently to protect them.  

Who we are:
From California Aesthetic Alliance and California Estheticians • Esthetician Advocacy. We are grassroots California Licensed Estheticians and Cosmetologists, licensed by the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology as part of the California Department of Consumer Affairs.

Wendy A. Jacobs
California Licensed Esthetician
Founder, California Aesthetic Alliance


Same Problem, Same Comments! Nothing will Change.

All available under one roof! And at prices salons couldn’t even get it on the shelf for!! Well done

Its the same old same old story in the beauty industry. “DON’T’ buy these products in a store there tampered with. There bootlegged products, brouhaha. Get real people. Professionals keep on whining about how there products are on the internet, in a store. WA WA WA.  This story is written from a add on Facebook so I thought I would give the advertisement my 2 cents.

Why do all of you get excited over this. More than 70 percent use these products and sell them in there salons. You pay for a ticket at a hair show and you learn from these company’s. You join PBA and they support those companies. BTC supports those companies, yet you will like and copy and paste there literature in your walls. Actions speak louder than words my friends. There getting there’s and your getting yours. Why bother. But you will still support the shows, websites, and product lines. And join the organizations.

Reply’s to my comment!

I quit buying from products from supply houses and quit using a certain line when it came out with their own box color. I don’t support lines and companies that don’t support me. I make my retail even when I’m not standing behind the chair and I don’t have to watch my products/my money sit on the shelf and collect dust. I’m tired of giving my hard earned money to big companies that could give a crap if we are out be they want to make money.

All these products are bought directly from manufacturers and sold to supermarkets.. they are not out of date … just cheaper

When a distributor”s contract with a company like TIGI or Any of the other’s, is terminated they sell their inventory to discount stores. We get angry at that company when we need to hold distributors​ accountable for how they sell off products they legally can not sell.

The big companies ARE selling it. End of story

I don’t know why people get so shocked about this anymore. It’s nothing new. “Diversion” isn’t real.
Manufacturers sell to whoever they want.

If you stock product that shows up in a supermarkets. You should dump your supplier and find an exclusively salon one.



The Real Hair Truth:Solving the Problem of Mislabeled Organic Personal Care Products

Every professional should know about the diction and definitions of organic products within our industry. The language of ingredients can be very vague at times and also very confusing. At no time would I personally take the information from a manufacturer and believe it. Go outside of your industry to chemists or your local state college to get the proper information on the ingredients listed in your salon products. If an individual sends you products without proper labeling and is just wrapped in tissue, BEWARE! How do you know if the product is “SAFE”. There are a lot of “MOM&POP” businesses who will start-up in their own homes and will visit a MICHAEL arts and craft store to purchase wax, scents, soaps and “WELLAH”, you have a supposedly ORGANIC PRODUCT”. Beware what you buy in the Beauty Industry and have it tested. You can go to your state college and the college will test the products you received for little to nothing. You can also hire a chemist and have a ingrediant  test done on the products. Below this is the official information from the USDA on Labeling of Organic Hair Care. You should know this take the time to educate yourself of the information the USDA offers us in the Beauty Industry. Look for the USDA organic seal on shampoos that claim to be organic. Although there are multiple “organic” and “natural” standards, each with its own varying criteria, the USDA Organic Standards are the “gold standard “for personal care products”.

The Certification, Accreditation, and Compliance Committee (CACC) recommends that organic personal care products be recognized explicitly by the National Organic Program (NOP) to ensure consumers and businesses alike that the products have an unquestioned home in the USDA National Organic Program.

Background: The policy statement of the USDA on August 23, 2005 extended the USDA regulations to cover the organic claims made by personal care products which meet the composition requirements for organic food. With this recognition has come the full force of certification and enforcement. While this is an improvement over what previously existed, an ever-increasing stream of personal care products making organic claims continues to flow in to the market place. In an April 2008 news bulletin, the NOP further explained USDA organic certification of cosmetics, body care products, and personal care products. Most recently, in July 2009, the NOP published a “DRAFT FOR COMMENT ONLY: Certification and Labeling of Soap Products Made From Agricultural Ingredients.” The Appendix contains these 3 NOP statements. None of these statements were developed through the Federal Rulemaking process, neither is it certain how durable these various statements will be at NOP.

Cosmetics, Body Care Products, and Personal Care Products

The Problem of Mislabeled Personal Care Products

The USDA is responsible for product organic claims but is not currently enforcing this in the area of personal care products. Consumers are not assured that organic claims are consistently reviewed and applied to the class of products known as personal care products. For instance, at a given retailer, one may find personal care products such as shampoos and lotions labeled as “organic” with no clear standards or regulatory underpinning for the organic claim–and unless the product is specifically labeled as “USDA Organic,” the word “organic” may be used with impunity. Manufacturers of personal care products that contain organic ingredients are hindered by a thicket of competing private standards and confusion regarding the applicability of the NOP to their products. Transactions lack the regulatory clarity that applies under the NOP to food products that contain organic ingredients.

Given the pace of development of this marketplace, and the important but uneven development of private standards, the NOP should take the necessary initial steps to bring this product class into a coordinated existence with organic food products under the regulation.

This recommendation takes the initial steps toward:

3) assuring consumers that the federal government is policing organic claims on personal care products

4) allowing for the development of a complete federal organic personal care product program


To facilitate the development of a single national standard for this product class, and to ensure consumers that organic personal care products meet a consistent standard, the CACC recommends that the following amendments be made to 7 CFR Part 205. Underlined text is to be added to the current rule.

1. §205.102. Add Definition of Personal Care Products:

(1) An article intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body or any part thereof for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance

2. §205.100(a) Add words “including personal care products”

Except for operations exempt or excluded in § 205.101, each production or handling operation or specified portion of a production or handling operation that produces or handles crops, livestock, livestock products, or other agricultural products including personal care

products that are intended to be sold, labeled, or represented as “100 percent organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))” must be certified according to the provisions of subpart E of this part and must meet all other applicable requirements of this part.

3. §205.102 Use of the term “organic.”

Any agricultural product, including personal care products, that is sold, labeled or represented as “100 percent organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))must be: * * *

4. §205.300 Use of the term, “organic.”

(a) The term, “organic” may only be used on labels and in labeling of raw or processed agricultural products, including ingredients of any product, without regard to the end use of the product, that is sold, labeled or represented as “100 percent organic,” “organic,” or “made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))must be: * * *

5. §205.311 USDA Seal

(a) The USDA seal described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section may be used only for farm or processed agricultural products, including personal care products, described in paragraphs * * *

The National Organic Program (NOP) has received numerous inquiries regarding its current thinking on the issue of products that meet the NOP program standards for organic products based on content, irrespective of the end use of the product. This statement is intended to clarify the NOP’s position with respect to this issue, and will be provided to all of our accredited certifying agents.

Agricultural commodities or products that meet the NOP standards for certification under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, 7 U.S.C. §§ 6501- 6522, can be certified under the NOP and be labeled as “organic” or “made with organic” pursuant to the NOP regulations, 7 C.F.R. part 205.300 et seq. To qualify for certification, the producer or handler must comply with all applicable NOP production, handling, and labeling regulations.

Operations currently certified under the NOP that produce agricultural products that meet the NOP standards to be labeled as “organic” and to carry the USDA organic seal, or which meet NOP standards to be labeled as “made with organic,” may continue to be so labeled as long as they continue to meet the NOP standards. Such certification may only be suspended or revoked after notice and opportunity for hearing.

There are agricultural products, including personal care products, that, by virtue of their organic agricultural product content, may meet the NOP standards and be labeled as “100 percent organic,” “organic” or “made with organic” pursuant to the NOP regulations. Businesses that manufacture and distribute such products may be certified under the NOP, and such products may be labeled as “100 percent organic,” “organic” or “made with organic” so long as they meet NOP requirements. Additionally, products that may be labeled “100 percent organic” or “organic” may also carry the USDA organic seal. If additional rule making is required for such products to address additional labeling issues or the use of synthetics in such products, the NOP will pursue such rule making as expeditiously as possible.

2) Cosmetics, Body Care Products, and Personal Care Products, April 2008

● FDA does not define or regulate the term “organic,” as it applies to cosmetics, body care, or personal care products.

● USDA regulates the term “organic” as it applies to agricultural products through its National Organic Program (NOP) regulation, 7 CFR Part 205.

● If a cosmetic, body care product, or personal care product contains or is made up of agricultural ingredients, and can meet the USDA/NOP organic production, handling, processing and labeling standards, it may be eligible to be certified under the NOP regulations.

● The operations which produce the organic agricultural ingredients, the handlers of these agricultural ingredients, and the manufacturer of the final product must all be certified by a USDA-accredited organic certifying agent.

● Once certified, cosmetics, personal care products, and body care products are eligible for the same 4 organic labeling categories as all other agricultural products, based on their organic content and other factors:

 “100 percent organic”–Product must contain (excluding water and salt) only organically produced ingredients. Products may display the USDA Organic Seal and must display the certifying agent’s name and address.

 “Organic”–Product must contain at least 95 percent organically produced ingredients (excluding water and salt). Remaining product ingredients must consist of nonagricultural substances approved on the National List or nonorganically produced agricultural products that are not commercially available in organic form, also on the National List. Products may display the USDA Organic Seal and must display the certifying agent’s name and address.

“Made with organic ingredients”– Products contain at least 70 percent organic ingredients and product label can list up to three of the organic ingredients or “food” groups on the principal display panel. For example, body lotion made with at least 70 percent organic ingredients (excluding water and salt) and only organic herbs may be labeled either “body lotion made with organic lavender, rosemary, and chamomile,” or “body lotion made with organic herbs.” Products may not display the USDA Organic Seal and must display the certifying agent’s name and address.

Less than 70 percent organic ingredients–Products cannot use the term “organic” anywhere on the principal display panel. However, they may identify the specific ingredients that are USDA-certified as being organically produced on the ingredients statement on the information panel. Products may

not display the USDA Organic Seal and may not display a certifying agent’s name and address. (Water and salt are also excluded here.)

● Any cosmetic, body care product, or personal care product that does not meet the production, handling, processing, labeling, and certification standards described above, may not state, imply, or convey in any way that the product is USDA-certified organic or meets the USDA organic standards.

● USDA has no authority over the production and labeling of cosmetics, body care products, and personal care products that are not made up of agricultural ingredients, or do not make any claims to meeting USDA organic standards.

● Cosmetics, body care products, and personal care products may be certified to other, private standards and be marketed to those private standards in the United States. These standards might include foreign organic standards, eco-labels, earth friendly, etc. USDA’s NOP does not regulate these labels at this time.

Certification and Labeling of Soap Products Made From Agricultural Ingredients

The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), 7 U.S.C. Section 6501, et. seq ., as amended, and implemented in 7 CFR Part 205, National Organic Program (NOP) Final Rule, regulates the production, handling, processing, and labeling of all raw or processed agricultural products to be sold, labeled, or represented as organic in the United States. In an August 23, 2005 policy statement issued by the NOP, the Program clarified that agricultural products may be certified and labeled in accordance with the Act and its implementing regulations regardless of end use. The statement allows for certain products, such as soaps, to be certified under the NOP, providing they comply with 7 CFR 205.

This document describes the interim procedures to be used by certified operations and certifying agents accredited by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to certify and label soap products as “organic” or “made with organic [specified ingredients]”, referred to throughout this document as “made with” products.

Soap is produced by a process called saponification, whereby oils are hydrolyzed by the addition of an alkali, yielding soap, glycerin, water and other byproducts. Glycerin is produced by this process and has been determined by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to be a synthetic and appears on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances as such. (Insecticidal soaps are permitted under 205.601 for crop production.)

The NOP has been asked to provide guidance on the labeling of soap that has been formulated and produced in accordance with the NOP regulations.

Some in the industry have expressed concern that allowing certification and labeling of soap as organic is a violation of OFPA. We disagree. The processing of agricultural products in accordance with NOP regulations often results in chemical or physical changes, many of which may involve the synthesis of new compounds. For example, the processes of baking bread or cooking meat create changes in the products that may involve the creation of new compounds. However, neither of these common products are viewed as synthetic under the regulations. Our interest is to create a consistent, fair policy that can be applied uniformly in a variety of situations. Therefore, we base our analysis of the process on the NOP regulations. The NOP regulations describe the inputs and processing which take place in the formulation and

manufacturing of a finished product; they do not prescribe the nature of the finished product itself. This allows agricultural products and allowed synthetics to be used to create a wide variety of products which may be eligible for certification, regardless of end use. Further, identification of products produced in compliance with the NOP regulations, and the percentage of organic products that they contain, allows for subsequent formulation into products which retain their eligibility for labeling as organic or “made with” organic products, depending upon the percentage of organic ingredients used to create the product. This allows producers to retain the added value of organic products throughout the production process and provides consumers with a choice when searching for products that contain organically produced ingredients.

In general, products that have been formulated in compliance with the NOP regulations may be eligible for certification as “organic” or “made with” products. Further, products produced in compliance with the regulations should be eligible for further processing and certification based on their true organic component content. Thus, a formulated product produced using 75% organic ingredients and 25% allowed synthetics is eligible for certification as a “made with” product. In addition, the “made with” products should carry a certified organic content of 75% when used in subsequent down-stream processing, under the condition that full disclosure of its organic content and other ingredients is provided by the manufacture. If a soap is produced using 80% certified organic oil and 20% sodium hydroxide, the soap would be eligible for certification as a soap “made with organic oils.” Further, the soap “made with organic oils” may be processed downstream into other products using 80% as the organic content for those calculations.

Labeling of these products should be consistent with labeling done for any other certified organic processed product, with full disclosure of the ingredients in the ingredient statement on the information panel. This should include all certified organic ingredients and any synthetics used to produce the product. Although Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations allow downstream processors to list “saponified organic oils” in the ingredient statement, FDA does not prohibit full disclosure of the organic and synthetic ingredients, consistent with NOP regulations. Therefore, ingredient statements for products containing saponified oils must include the name of the actual organic ingredient and the synthetic ingredients used to create the soap. If the saponified oils are produced as a part of a separate process, they may be listed as a parenthetical statement, such as “saponified organic oils (organic coconut oil, potassium hydroxide), water, glycerin, beet juice color.”

Guidance: Soap products formulated using certified organic oils and materials included on the National List may be certified and labeled as “organic” or “made with organic [specified ingredients].” Further, when manufacturers of saponified organic oils produce such products in compliance with the regulations and provide certified formulations to downstream processors, they may be further processed into “organic” or “made with” products.

When saponified oils are produced by a certified organic handler and are to be sold as “made with organic oils” for further processing into certified “organic” or “made with” products, they must be accompanied by a complete ingredient statement which gives the actual percentage of the organic ingredients contained in the “made with” product. When labeling products produced with saponified oil, the ingredient statement of the further processed product must include the ingredients used to produce the saponified oil. As an option, the saponified organic oil may be stated on the ingredient statement followed by a parenthetical statement. Listing the saponified oils without listing the ingredients used to produce the saponified oils is not sufficient.

Procedures: As always, certifiers must review and approve all organic handling plans for products produced with saponified oils, including the ingredient statements for the saponified oils themselves, prior to issuing certification for handling operations producing these products. Producers of saponified oils to be further processed into other personal care products must provide statements of the type and percent of all ingredients used to produce the saponified oils so that this information may be included in the ingredient statement of the finished product. All labels for certified organic soaps and products containing saponified oils must be reviewed and approved by the certifying agent prior to printing and labeling.

This is what they, dont want YOU to know!

Workers have a right to a safe workplace. The law requires employers to provide their employees with working conditions that are free of known dangers. OSHA provides information, training, and assistance to workers and employers. Be aware that in our industry manufacturers are deceptive. They want you to buy their products, and will customize class’s in order for you to be presented with their latest and greatest lotions, powders, soaps etc.  I was talking with a very very bright gentleman of the next film “Beautiful LieS”. He said a statement that really hit home to me. When a professional buys a ticket to a hair show such as “Premier, NAHA, Cosmoprof, etc” why should they buy the products there, if they can find the products in a commercial outlet. The major manufacturers have given up on LOYALTY TOO YOU and SELLING EXCLUSIVE products to the business professional in our industry. I would not even give a current hair show the time of day. I can see their products in a store. I thought our products supposed are supposed to be exclusive, and only sold in salons. Come on! And do you really know what ARE the ingredients you are using in your salon products? And most of you products you use in the salon for Hair coloring, Keratin treatments, Permanent waves can be purchased by the consumer. Where did our exclusive go???? The MAJOR manufacturers have sold us out. In this months edition of Brokenchair.com 90% of the products advertised in this magazine are found in the commercial sector or on the internet. Available to the consumer at their finger tips. Basically its the magazine of the “Brainwashed’. And the topics of literature in the magazine are the same ol, same ol! Be responsible everyone, and be the change The Real Beauty Industry needs. Change in this industry has to come from you! Then others will see you as a role model and you will set the standard for others.

Walk the Walk everyone!

Take back your industry!

You will see the latest in industry magazines everyone,”How To” of the layered haircut with a Ombre color or join Farouk’s Dream Team, Learn client consultation. But not touching on the politics of a industry broken by Major Manufacturers. 

They dont want you to know, what they know, that you dont need to know. See this is what they want you to know, “Keep the Young Dumb, and don’t worry were looking out for you”. “We are your legal representative of the Beauty Industry as the PBA.ORG would say, REALLY?”  Take it upon yourself to know your products, and all the ingredients in the products. Your customers health and yours is very important. And I would not like to see anyone gain an illness because the greed of a manufacturer cannot be controled. If you work in a salon go to the owner and ask for the MSDS sheets of the products you use for your salon services. Know what you are using. Its your body. And you get only one go around in this lifetime! You are all very, very special people. And you cannot be replaced.

OSHA will continue to conduct inspections in response to complaints and/or referrals. Workers may file a complaint to have OSHA inspect their workplace if they believe that their employer is not following OSHA standards or that there are serious hazards. Employees can file a complaint with OSHA by calling 1-800-321-OSHA (6742) or by printing out the complaint form and mailing or faxing to your local OSHA area office. Complaints that are signed by an employee are more likely to result in an inspection. 

OSHA can help answer questions or concerns from employers and workers. Contact your local OSHA office if you have any questions about a product that you are using or its material safety data sheet (MSDS). To reach your regional or area OSHA office, go to OSHA’s Regional & Area Offices web page. 

Hair salon owners and beauty schools can contact OSHA’s free and confidential on-site consultation service to help determine if there are hazards at their salon and work with OSHA on correcting any identified hazards. On-site consultations services are separate from enforcement activities and do not result in penalties or citations. To contact OSHA’s free consultation service, go to OSHA’s On-Site Consultationweb page or call 1-800-321-OSHA (6742) and press number 4. 

Salon owners and workers can also request the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, at no cost, to help identify and correct any health hazard in the workplace through its Health Hazard Evaluation Program. Contact NIOSH at 1-800-CDC-INFO [1-800-232-4636].

UNILEVER! Does Mis-labeling Mean Anything To You?

Well, Well , Well, here we go again in a multi-multi billion industry of deception and mis-labeling. Another coporate big wig is getting there due. Unilever is getting taken to court by Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Esensten L.L.P. In a class action lawsuit. You can read as follows about the Lawsuit!

Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30 Day Smoothing Kit Investigation

Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Esensten L.L.P. is currently investigating alleged false, deceptive, and misleading claims made by Unilever in connection with the company’s marketing of purported “Formaldehyde Free” Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30 Day Smoothing Kit (“Product”).

Unilever is one of the world’s leading suppliers of fast moving consumer goods. Unilever markets the Product under its wholly owned Suave brand name as a Keratin-based hair straightening product that is “an affordable at-home alternative” to professional salon treatments that’s “formaldehyde free.”

However, Unilever may not be able to substantiate its claims. In addition, Unilever may have failed to inform consumers that the Product contains a chemical known as “Tetrasodium EDTA,” which is mainly synthesized from formaldehyde. Unilever also may have failed to inform consumers that the Product contains a chemical preservative known as “DMDM Hydantoin,” which is an antimicrobial formaldehyde releaser with the trade name Glydant. Formaldehyde has been classified as a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing substance) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and as a probable human carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. An investigation is underway regarding Unilever’s marketing and advertising practices under the Suave brand name. Unilever states on there website that 160 million times a day, someone somewhere chooses a Unilever product. From feeding your family to keeping your home clean and fresh, our brands are part of everyday life.

List of Unilever brands

  • Alberto-Culver
  • Axe
  • Becel
  • Blue Band
  • Domestos
  • Dove
  • Flora
  • Heartbrand
  • Hellmann’s
  • Knorr
  • Lifebuoy
  • Lipton
  • Lux (soap)
  • Lynx
  • Omo
  • Rexona
  • Simple
  • Sure
  • Surf
  • Sunsilk
  • TIGI (haircare)
  • Wall’s
  • Vaseline – This should be very interesting on the outcome of this lawsuit! I thought everyone would learn from this with the outcome of Brazialian Blowout!