SB1620 would exempt natural hair braiders from Hawaii’s Barbering and Cosmetology Licensing Act when they are only performing natural hair braiding services and do not hold themselves out as offering regulated cosmetology or barbering services. The bill defines “natural hair braiding” to include practices such as twisting, locking, weaving, cornrowing, braiding, use of extensions and accessories, wig making, and related topical products, while excluding chemical services such as dyeing, relaxing, straightening, or the use of certain bonding agents.
The measure also clarifies that the exemption does not remove general business obligations, such as business registration, commercial activity licensing, or tax requirements. For salons that perform only natural hair braiding, the owner would remain responsible for worker competence, sanitation, and consumer health and safety, and consumers could seek damages for injuries in court. The bill also allows private certification to remain available and permits employers to require it.
Impact
If enacted, SB1620 would amend chapter 439A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by adding a new statutory exemption for natural hair braiders. It would narrow the reach of the state’s barbering and cosmetology licensing regime by removing licensing requirements for this specific practice, while preserving enforcement against anyone who crosses into regulated cosmetology or barbering services. The bill would also leave intact general business, tax, and consumer protection obligations, and it would create explicit responsibilities for salon owners operating braiding-only salons.
Sentiment
The available legislative record suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill. The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee passed the measure unanimously, 5-0, and it was reported unamended. The bill’s findings frame the exemption as a way to reduce an undue burden on practitioners in a traditional occupation that the legislature says poses limited health and safety risks when limited to braiding services.
Contention
The main policy tension is between occupational licensing and access to work in a traditional hair-braiding profession. Supporters appear to view the current licensing framework as overly broad because it requires training in cosmetology subjects unrelated to braiding, such as nail care and makeup. Any concern on the other side would likely center on consumer protection, sanitation, and the possibility that braiders could drift into regulated cosmetology services without proper oversight; the bill addresses that by preserving sanctions for unlicensed practice and by limiting the exemption to braiding-only services.