An Illinois task force warns in a new report that occupational licensing disproportionately harms “poor and disadvantaged communities.” Business owner Samantha Carter saw the effects firsthand as a teenager.
She loved hair braiding and styling, so she enrolled in a cosmetology program after finishing high school in Urbana. But prior to completing her hours, she made a mistake that threatened her career before it started. Carter committed a cannabis offense and was arrested on Dec. 8, 2000.
The felony conviction she received is the only blemish on her record. Carter has been a model citizen for decades, operating a salon and braiding school, and serving on the Champaign County Board. Yet one strike can be enough to stop a person from working in a licensed occupation like cosmetology.
State lawmakers give the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) discretion to approve or deny applications without making a pre-determination. The only way for someone like Carter to know if an offense is disqualifying is to pay tuition, complete all coursework, and take the state-mandated exams. Only then will regulators issue a decision.
Carter decided to risk it, so she finished her program while her criminal case proceeded. Her gamble paid off with a cosmetology license in 2001. But the potential for revocation remains, even 23 years later. Illinois does not impose time limits for regulatory restrictions on people with criminal records.
“I had nightmares for years thinking the IDFPR would later come knocking on my door to tell me I couldn’t practice hair styling or revoke my license,” Carter writes in the report, published Nov. 12, 2024.
As a member of the Comprehensive Licensing Information to Minimize Barriers (CLIMB) task force, a bipartisan group created by the Illinois General Assembly, Carter collaborated with state lawmakers, regulators, academics, and social sector leaders for two years.
Illinois licenses more than 100 professions, including higher-paying jobs in medicine. But the task force focused on low-to-middle-income occupations, where service providers feel the regulatory burdens more severely.
“Current licensing requirements, ostensibly designed to protect public health and safety, instead can unintentionally impose unnecessary and onerous barriers to entry into the workforce, disproportionately affecting poor and disadvantaged communities,” the task force concludes.
One recommended reform would create the right to a pre-determination for people with criminal records, so they could know before spending thousands of dollars on training if licensure is even possible. Advance warning of a career-ending veto is only fair.
Helping people re-enter society after incarceration is just one issue. The task force also looked at ways to ease licensing burdens in specific occupations. Two opportunities emerged in the beauty industry.
First, the task force recommends that African-style hair braiders, who currently need 300 hours of classroom instruction before they can offer services, should be exempt from licensure. Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, and 30 other states already have taken this step, which makes sense. Braiding is a safe occupation that does not involve haircutting, heat, or harsh chemicals.
Second, the task force recommends reducing the education requirements for a cosmetology license, currently 1,500 hours. Other states, including California, New York and Texas, impose much lower burdens.
Illinois should follow their lead. A study from our public interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, finds a debt trap for aspiring cosmetologists. Within Illinois, three of four cosmetology students borrow money to attend school. And fewer than one in three graduate on time.
Scaling back unnecessary licenses that aren’t needed to protect public health and safety would help. The task force also looked at ways to prevent new, unnecessary licenses. One safeguard would be “sunrise” reviews, an analysis of need before lawmakers create additional licensing. Currently in Illinois, a professional association asks for a license, the General Assembly votes on it, and the first time the state checks to see if the change was necessary could be years later.
Less intrusive policy answers are often available, which sunrise committees could explore. Licensing, the most burdensome and expensive regulatory tool available, should be a last resort. Some people can afford the expense. But the admission price can be too high for many others.
