Silver Immersion wrote:
There is no union for mua and hairstylists first of all(I wish there was!). Second of all, to style hair you do not need a license(ex; you can braid hair w/o a license, but you can't cut or shampoo), but to do chemicals you do have to be licensed. In MD there is a mua license that only requires 40 classroom hours to be licensed. No test.
Some mua are great at creating a beautiful illusion, but have no idea about sanitation and disinfection rules to protect them and their model. A cosmo license(like I have) gives you the ok to do makeup, all chemicals, waxing, apply makeup......you get the idea. Guess in the end its your call....

sorry but their IS a union for makeup & hair... Makeup union in Los Angeles is local 706.  Also, In cosmetology school they teach you like 5 min of makeup IF that...

MakeupArtist laT wrote:

right!

You dont even need a certificate from a makeup school.... I am living proof

Ashley Elizabeth wrote:

You've got to be kidding me!  Ever heard of IATSE?

Please don't speak about that which you obviously know nothing about.

ha ha, I LOVE YOU!!!

Thomas Watkin wrote:
A license to put makeup on a model at a photo shoot? That borders on insanity.

Do I need a license to take pictures?

actually I am glad you don't need one in Calif....because I have never had any formal training (formal training was almost unheard of when I got into the business)....  HOWEVER....  I think there should be a basic test given for sanitation knowledge (small price to issue this certificate)  because I believe there are just too many new artists and some old that just haven't a clue about sanitation.

Maycuplover wrote:

You dont even need a certificate from a makeup school.... I am living proof

did you read my all of my post?

Mary wrote:

actually I am glad you don't need one in Calif....because I have never had any formal training (formal training was almost unheard of when I got into the business)....  HOWEVER....  I think there should be a basic test given for sanitation knowledge (small price to issue this certificate)  because I believe there are just too many new artists and some old that just haven't a clue about sanitation.

exactly!!! I worked 10 years in makeup before getting my license and I only did it to cover my ass because of the law in Md.

Ashley Elizabeth wrote:

You've got to be kidding me!  Ever heard of IATSE?

Please don't speak about that which you obviously know nothing about.

Silver Immersion wrote:

Thamks for the info...I hadn't heard of it before.
But being polite is nice also. We're all here to give info not be snippy

MakeupArtist laT wrote:

did you read my all of my post?

I think I was relplying to a post someone left you off of your original one... thats all...

Decadence Dernier wrote:
In my state, it is period. Salon or no salon. I live in Illinois. That's why I was asking about other states.

I think others have already mentioned the exemption for those working in film, unions, and related industries, but I thought I'd post this anyway.  It's for Illinois.

In general, this seems to be a bigger argument between makeup artists at counters, freelance artists who paid to actually get a cosmo license, and those who do primarily brides.  As for the point regarding sanitation: a license isn't the same as asking for references.  And it has nothing to do with the quality of one's work.  That's ability and experience.

From:  [link] http://ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4. … of+1985%2E [/link]

Illinois Compiled Statutes:  PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS
(225 ILCS 410/) Barber, Cosmetology, Esthetics, and Nail Technology Act of 1985.
      (225 ILCS 410/Art. I heading) ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS

(c)  Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to require licensure of individuals employed by the motion picture, film, television, stage play or related industry for the purpose of providing cosmetology or esthetics services to actors of that industry while engaged in the practice of cosmetology or esthetics as a part of that person's employment. (Source: P.A. 90?580, eff. 5?21?98; 90?742, eff. 8?13?98; 91?357, eff. 7?29?99.)

TSHarrington  wrote:
Ringworm twenty minutes after application? I find that difficult to belive as ringworm is nothing more than athlete's foot of the face/arms/legs etc. rather than the foot.  It takes a few days before it begins to show. 

I'm not saying that you could not get it from using the same brush, just find it a bit impossible for it to show up quite so quickly.

Believe what you want sweetie. I was a witness as well as the other people at the shoot. Turned out another model she did make-up on the day before had one, but she didn't realize it was that. Was trying to cover it up best she could thinking it was a bad blemish. I wish I was making this stuff, but I'm not.

Decadence Dernier wrote:
People on here seem to get things twisted when a simple inquiry is done and attitudish at that as well.

I didn't say a license equaled talent, so I have no idea where that came from. A degree in fashion concentration doesn't make you talented. But what's wrong with having the talent and the degree?  For my industry it gives you way more leverage. My industry I said. I'm not understanding why so many people are up in arms about this.  It's like no matter what you post and how nice you post it, the majority of people are going to use it as an oppurtunity to flex their rude muscles or vent.

The subject was about the rules about licensing for make-up artists in other states. I just wanted to acquire info, that's all. Learn a little something.  What happened to coming on forums to share and receive?? Being a psuedo community?? Instead of trying to belittle people. I don't understand.

I don't know if you saw my post, but I did feel the need to correct your statement of who the cosmetology requirements apply to in IL. 

I would imagine that a makeup artist with poor sanitation habits would get a reputation for it, and asking for references might tell you more about her habits than a piece of paper.  It's like having a piece of paper that says, "I show up to work on time," vs. a list of references who can support that statement. 

I don't think a lot of pro makeup artists would actually get that much leverage from having a license.  Especially since so many of us are exempt from needing one in the first place.  And it sounds like that's pretty typical of a lot of the other states.

PKi4-Paul Kiefer wrote:
people can live there dream and do what they love to do without have to have some paper or someone elses permission! its up to the person who is hiring or using the MUA.

Do you feel the same way about Dentists, Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers, Teachers, Real Estate Agents, Plumbers, and Electricians, and even Drivers of trucks and automobiles?   

Honestly, your response is very simplistic.

The purpose behind virtually all of these licensing regulations is to protect the public from practitioners that do not meet certain minimum requirements.  For the States that license MUA's, the reason is typically rooted in sanitation and hygiene.  No state cares if you are a good or bad MUA.  They only care that you know about proper hygiene so as not to pass infections from one person to another.

MakeupEnvy wrote:

I don't know if you saw my post, but I did feel the need to correct your statement of who the cosmetology requirements apply to in IL. 

I would imagine that a makeup artist with poor sanitation habits would get a reputation for it, and asking for references might tell you more about her habits than a piece of paper.  It's like having a piece of paper that says, "I show up to work on time," vs. a list of references who can support that statement. 

I don't think a lot of pro makeup artists would actually get that much leverage from having a license.  Especially since so many of us are exempt from needing one in the first place.  And it sounds like that's pretty typical of a lot of the other states.

I read your response. Once again, I will reinterate that I wasn't speaking in terms of the license vs anything. Nor saying it makes up for anything.  And I said twice "in my industry" as far as leverage goes. I don't need to be corrected, I desire to informed. That portion of the act wasn't forwarded to me.  This isn't a competition of who is right or who was wrong. Like I said above, what happened to just sharing and receiving? Politely? Geez.

TSHarrington  wrote:
For anyone who is interested: (in my 'day' job, I deal with these sorts of things, so it has nothing to do with 'believing', and everything to do with years of education and field work)



http://www.dhpe.org/infect/ringworm.html

Sorry, I didn't even see yours when I posted.  But now two sources.

In Focus Makeup Art wrote:
In Texas you don't have to be liscenced to do makeup but you can't apply moisturizer  or do skin care before hand. You also can't cut or color hair but the loophole here is you can dry style on set but not in a salon. Thats the reason I rent my studio out to photographers...I'm always in a photography studio

I will say though that having a liscence doesn't make you talented.

**AMEN..** I HAVE SEEN MANY FREE LANCE MAKEUP ARTIST WHO ROCK!! AND MAKEUP ARTISTS THAT ARE LISCENCED AND SUCK!.. MY MOTHER IS A COSMOTOLOGIST AND I ASKED HER IF I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE WHOLE COURSE TO GET LISCENCED AND SHE SAID NO I CAN TAKE A SIMPLE ASTETICS (DK IF SPELLED RIGHT) CLASS JUST DEALING WITH THE FACE ..

Thomas Watkin wrote:
A license to put makeup on a model at a photo shoot? That borders on insanity.

Do I need a license to take pictures?

If photographers took pictures by rubbing their camera on people's faces over and over again. . .

Mary wrote:
We have an exemption in California and don't need to be licensed, I don't know of any really good busy artists in my area with a current comsetology license...my assistant has one and shes good  but she doesnt get any work yet on her own.

What exactly does the exemption say? I've been under the impression you had to be licensed in California. Which is why I have to rely on models doing their own makeup because there aren't any qualified MUA near me. (I live in a town of 1400 and the ranching community doesn't have a big demand for cosmetics.)

Makeup by Diane wrote:
funny this is here- i was going to start a new post.

I *JUST* got off the phone with the Arizona Board of Cosmetologists. Since seeing the posts about whether Brides are considered part of the entertainment exclusion or not, I figured I'd better find out before I take on any brides! 

AZ Law:

Donna Aune at the Board of Cosmetology just told me that in AZ, you Do need to be licensed to work on any brides or wedding parties. Brides don't come under the entertainment exclusion, even if you work on location with them (and not in a salon).

You do NOT need to be licensed to do makeup for entertainment. (But you can't cut, color, wax brows or anything either, if you aren't licensed.) I am a member of IATSE and I work on print, films, commercials, etc.

The Only other exemption, besides Entertainment, is for retail. But even they can not legally apply makeup. They are only allowed to show colors- no makeovers without a license. They just don't have to be licensed to work at a retail counter.

Hope this helps!
diane

THIS response actually did help. Thank you for the info Diane.

KatAragon wrote:

Vic, according to when we were doing our research for our salon in VA, and wanted to hire an assistant, we found that the assistant could not do anything to the hair but shampoo it. Not even style it! That was a couple of years back thought so not sure if it's changed now.

Hey kat!

I have to go back through my emails from last year but I do have confirmation that as long as I'm not using chemicals, I am allowed to perform light styling.  Hec, don't know if you were aware of this but up until 2004 you didn't even need a license in VA to do tattooing (including permanant cosmetic tattooing!) or body piercing!  WTF?!   Before 04, If someone could come at my face with a needle and not need a license to do it...

To the OP:

I guess the point is I do not carry a license to do what I do (except I do have a business license).  As far as I know, I am not required to have a license to do what I do either (makeup and light hair styling).  In this business, you are at risk no matter what (licensed or not).  My advice would be to carry a nice insurance policy!

Decadence Dernier wrote:

Yea, my main concern was about sanitation. In the end brushes that repeatedly touch face after face are being used.  I've been witness to a model getting a really bad skin rash  after a shoot, and then another getting ringworm almost twenty minutes after make-up application. 

One could say a good MUA would know better, but how are you really supposed to tell? The thing is you can't until it is too late.

In my state they are soon going to make it where even braiders and other people who just style hair will be required to have some type of license as well.

Some of the biggest dirty birds that I encountered in my career were cosmetology license artists. Just like talent, license, diploma or any kind of paper can not buy you ethics or personal hygiene.

ganeshkarma wrote:

Some of the biggest dirty birds that I encountered in my career were cosmetology license artists. Just like talent, license, diploma or any kind of paper can not buy you ethics or personal hygiene.

Dirty birds...

hehehehehehe I like that

ganeshkarma wrote:
Some of the biggest dirty birds that I encountered in my career were cosmetology license artists. Just like talent, license, diploma or any kind of paper can not buy you ethics or personal hygiene.

ditto

SingingSabre wrote:
I spend my days with a crapload of cosmotologists.  I'll ask them what the laws in AZ are and get back to y'all.

Az makup artist!! (cosmetologist-covers hair skin nails massage...))

I am a licensed hair and makeup artist. In most states you do not need a license to do makeup-but in Tx for example you need a license to apply eyelashes!!!
--depends on state!
I do support makeup artist being lic. because of sanitation, knowledge of skin disorders and diseases etc...

Thx !


L

Makeup by Diane wrote:
funny this is here- i was going to start a new post.

I *JUST* got off the phone with the Arizona Board of Cosmetologists. Since seeing the posts about whether Brides are considered part of the entertainment exclusion or not, I figured I'd better find out before I take on any brides! 

AZ Law:

Donna Aune at the Board of Cosmetology just told me that in AZ, you Do need to be licensed to work on any brides or wedding parties. Brides don't come under the entertainment exclusion, even if you work on location with them (and not in a salon).

You do NOT need to be licensed to do makeup for entertainment. (But you can't cut, color, wax brows or anything either, if you aren't licensed.) I am a member of IATSE and I work on print, films, commercials, etc.

The Only other exemption, besides Entertainment, is for retail. But even they can not legally apply makeup. They are only allowed to show colors- no makeovers without a license. They just don't have to be licensed to work at a retail counter.

Hope this helps!

Hi Diane!!
Lorri
diane

Silver Immersion wrote:
There is no union for mua and hairstylists first of all(I wish there was!). Second of all, to style hair you do not need a license(ex; you can braid hair w/o a license, but you can't cut or shampoo), but to do chemicals you do have to be licensed. In MD there is a mua license that only requires 40 classroom hours to be licensed. No test.
Some mua are great at creating a beautiful illusion, but have no idea about sanitation and disinfection rules to protect them and their model. A cosmo license(like I have) gives you the ok to do makeup, all chemicals, waxing, apply makeup......you get the idea. Guess in the end its your call....

The union is the International alliance of theatrical stage employees, motion picture technicians, artists and allied crafts of the United States and Canada.  IATSE for short.

TSHarrington  wrote:
(Great port by the way!)

Thank you!

Decadence Dernier wrote:
Lately, I've been coming into connection with MUA's that do not possess cosmetology licenses.  Now, I was always concerned about feeling I was pretty sure that was a requirement and if not should be.  We're talking about dealing with people's skin here.  Since I am asked to find MUA's for client projects often I was very curious to know. I was told by a MUA that one wasn't required in this state to do make-up and left it alone until recently a photographer was very hesitant, almost reluctant to tell me if his MUA of choice for our shoots had a license.  When I found out she didn't I went on ahead and finally did the research.

In my state, it IS unlawful to do make-up without a license unless you are applying the make-up as a brand purveyor, ya know like a MAC associate, Estee Lauder counter girl, or even Mary Kay salesperson. Otherwise, you are falsely presenting yourself as a cosmetologist.

So with that said, I'm curious to know what the laws are for cosmetologist licenses in other states. Also just thoughts of some of the MUA's on this topic.

Sooooo, me being an AVON Beauty Advisor and Independent Sales Rep, im ok in pretty much any state?? sounds good to me, ive had certain trainning, so it makes sense.

Decadence Dernier wrote:
THIS response actually did help. Thank you for the info Diane.

Glad to do it.

For everyone: like others have written here, every state is different and you should be aware of the rules where you live. Try your State Board of Cosmetology; I found in AZ, at least, they're not only the most helpful of the state departments I've talked with, but also the easiest to contact.

[*hi Lorri! ]