Committee debates training hours, apprenticeships and returning to practical exams

Lawmakers and witnesses debated how many hours and what types of training should be required for cosmetologists and aestheticians and whether supervised salon-based training or apprenticeships could expand workforce access.

Leslie Rosti, director of state relations for the Professional Beauty Association and executive director of the Cosmetology Compact Commission, said Pennsylvania's esthetician training (300 hours) is low compared with most states and that many states require 600 or more hours; she said cosmetology national conversations often point to about 1,200 hours as a target. "That is, very low, across the nation," Rosti said of the 300-hour esthetician standard.

Witnesses described alternative supervised-training models (Iowa's supervised services): an initial short sanitation course, on-site supervision and inspection, customer notice of trainee status, and an optional pathway to licensure after a set number of supervised hours. Supporters said the model helps those who cannot attend full-time school; critics warned apprenticeships need defined endpoints so workers do not remain indefinitely unlicensed. School leaders said the practical exam was removed by the testing vendor and replaced with practical-style questions on the written test, and most schools maintain internal hands-on assessments to ensure competency.

Committee members asked whether dermaplaning could be taught safely in schools or salons and whether esthetician hours should increase if higher-risk procedures are added to curricula. Panelists said adding dermaplaning would likely require additional hours or tighter supervision and that stakeholders should reconvene to work through specifics.