Four years after its introduction, "Waterless Spa Pedicures" continues to be my most popular class. Whether I'm working with clients or other salon owners and manicurists, I'm often asked why I chose to go waterless.
In early 2005, I replaced an expensive whirlpool footspa with a comfortable leather recliner and introduced a new service, the Precision Nails Foot Detail. By eliminating the water, I created a more efficient pedicure, a “waterless spa pedicure” that's much safer for clients and better for our environment. As admirable as that sounds, especially now that more salons consider themselves "green," that's not why I did it. Saving the planet wasn't nearly as important as saving myself . . . from the hassles of using a footspa. Despite its beautiful looks and "pipe-less technology," my $13,000 footspa never worked consistently; moreover, it barely circulated the water and required too much time and effort to clean. After 16 months of ownership, I realized that avoiding technology would be better than using the "best" technology, and sold my footspa.
I also realized that, contrary to what I learned in beauty school and demonstrated for the manicurist licensing exam, California's Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (BBC) does not require that feet be soaked and/or cleaned before a pedicure service. Allow me to repeat myself, soaking and/or cleaning is not required. So when I clean my client's feet during a waterless spa pedicure, I am exceeding what the BBC requires. At the same time, I can ignore California's strict regulations for disinfecting footspas, or any other container that holds water.
Why waterless? Eliminating the water eliminates:
• the expense of a footspa, including maintenance and parts;
• the space required to install it;
• the expense of plumbing, including labor and permits;
• 12- 15 gallons of water each pedicure;
• the expense of water and sewage fees;
• the risks associated with water-borne bacteria;
• the time to clean a footspa, or any other container;
• the labor involved in cleaning;
• the expense and disposal of disinfection products; and
• the need for a pedicure-equipment cleaning log.
After considering all the benefits of waterless pedicures, I can't imagine doing it any other way, but the choice is yours.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Medical Pedicures
Despite what podiatrists advertise, nail educators teach and trade magazines promote, beauty licensees in California cannot perform "medical pedicures" or "medi-pedis" that include procedures that exceed the scope of manicuring practice. Our Board of Barbering and Cosmetology recently released the following statement:
March 2, 2009
The Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (Board) has received several inquiries regarding defining the term of “Medical Pedicure”. Although the Board does not define or regulate medical procedures, the manicuring industry is governed by the Board and shall adhere to the Board’s Laws and Regulations when performing manicuring services in any facility within the State of California.
The Medical Office offering manicuring services must maintain a valid establishment license issued by the Board.
The Medical Office manicurist performing services must maintain a valid license issued by the Board.
The Medical Office manicurist are not licensed by the Board as medical professionals and may not engage in services outside the manicurist scope of practices as defined in the Board’s Laws and Regulations.
Any licensed manicurist providing services whether in a salon or a facility identified as a “Medical Office” (i.e. Podiatric Office, Hospital, Medical Clinic, etc.) shall provide manicurist services to include the nail care practice of cutting, trimming, polishing, coloring, tinting, cleansing, or manicuring the nails of any person or massaging, cleansing, or beautifying the hands or feet of any person.
Any licensed manicurist shall not use razor-edged tools or other instrument to remove calluses. Callus removal is not within the manicurist scope of practice and shall not be performed by a manicurist in the State of California.
March 2, 2009
The Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (Board) has received several inquiries regarding defining the term of “Medical Pedicure”. Although the Board does not define or regulate medical procedures, the manicuring industry is governed by the Board and shall adhere to the Board’s Laws and Regulations when performing manicuring services in any facility within the State of California.
The Medical Office offering manicuring services must maintain a valid establishment license issued by the Board.
The Medical Office manicurist performing services must maintain a valid license issued by the Board.
The Medical Office manicurist are not licensed by the Board as medical professionals and may not engage in services outside the manicurist scope of practices as defined in the Board’s Laws and Regulations.
Any licensed manicurist providing services whether in a salon or a facility identified as a “Medical Office” (i.e. Podiatric Office, Hospital, Medical Clinic, etc.) shall provide manicurist services to include the nail care practice of cutting, trimming, polishing, coloring, tinting, cleansing, or manicuring the nails of any person or massaging, cleansing, or beautifying the hands or feet of any person.
Any licensed manicurist shall not use razor-edged tools or other instrument to remove calluses. Callus removal is not within the manicurist scope of practice and shall not be performed by a manicurist in the State of California.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Manicuring Curriculum: Change for the Better?
(This five-part examination of proposed changes to California's manicuring curriculum highlights the failures of our present model of licensee training.)
California's Board of Barbering and Cosmetology has proposed changes to its manicuring curriculum, including an increase in required hours from 400 to 500. If done properly, the subsequent changes will make a constructive and significant impact on the manicuring profession for both consumers and licensees. If done poorly, the changes will make what has been acknowledged as a bad situation even worse.
The specific purpose of "revising the manicuring curriculum" should be to ensure that the required education produces licensed manicurists capable of working competently and safely in licensed establishments. A well-designed manicuring curriculum must be relevant, flexible and comprehensive. Based on scientifically accurate information, it must promote best practices, not perpetuate misinformation and an inadequate standard of practice as it does now.
Competence
The exceptionally poor work done by many manicurists undermines our profession and poses a serious risk to consumer safety. The average consumer mistakenly believes that a manicuring license proves technical competence. Why do we allow incompetent individuals to obtain licenses? Has the focus on safety obscured the benefits of requiring licensees to demonstrate quality work? If we continue to accept mediocrity as our standard of practice, we will continue to produce an incompetent workforce incapable of meeting the demands and expectations of consumers.
As a successful nail professional, I consider the competent performance of the following tasks fundamental to manicuring, regardless of "trends:"
• shaping the nails (trimming, filing, and buffing);
• conditioning the skin surrounding the nail (eponychium, not "cuticle");
• conditioning the skin of the hands and feet (exfoliating, moisturizing and massaging);
• smoothing (not removing) calluses;
• applying and removing polish;
• applying and removing artificial nails, including natural nail repairs;
• and most important, doing all of the above in a manner that protects the health and safety of consumers and the licensee.
California's Board of Barbering and Cosmetology has proposed changes to its manicuring curriculum, including an increase in required hours from 400 to 500. If done properly, the subsequent changes will make a constructive and significant impact on the manicuring profession for both consumers and licensees. If done poorly, the changes will make what has been acknowledged as a bad situation even worse.
The specific purpose of "revising the manicuring curriculum" should be to ensure that the required education produces licensed manicurists capable of working competently and safely in licensed establishments. A well-designed manicuring curriculum must be relevant, flexible and comprehensive. Based on scientifically accurate information, it must promote best practices, not perpetuate misinformation and an inadequate standard of practice as it does now.
Competence
The exceptionally poor work done by many manicurists undermines our profession and poses a serious risk to consumer safety. The average consumer mistakenly believes that a manicuring license proves technical competence. Why do we allow incompetent individuals to obtain licenses? Has the focus on safety obscured the benefits of requiring licensees to demonstrate quality work? If we continue to accept mediocrity as our standard of practice, we will continue to produce an incompetent workforce incapable of meeting the demands and expectations of consumers.
As a successful nail professional, I consider the competent performance of the following tasks fundamental to manicuring, regardless of "trends:"
• shaping the nails (trimming, filing, and buffing);
• conditioning the skin surrounding the nail (eponychium, not "cuticle");
• conditioning the skin of the hands and feet (exfoliating, moisturizing and massaging);
• smoothing (not removing) calluses;
• applying and removing polish;
• applying and removing artificial nails, including natural nail repairs;
• and most important, doing all of the above in a manner that protects the health and safety of consumers and the licensee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
