Committee advances bill to allow Department of Labor-registered apprenticeships for barbers and manicurists

House Bill 13‑20, which would allow licensed barbers and manicurists to register apprenticeships with the U.S. Department of Labor, was advanced by the Pensions and Labor committee and passed by voice/roll call 10‑1.

Supporters told the committee the measure would create a paid, work‑based pathway to licensure that reduces the cost of entry and expands opportunities in areas without cosmetology schools. Opponents and some members asked for additional safeguards, including human‑trafficking awareness and consideration of whether key Department of Labor standards should be codified in Indiana law.

Representative Wesco, who presented the bill, said the legislation “will enable a licensed barber or manicurist to register an apprenticeship with the US Department of Labor. And upon the apprentice completing the apprenticeship, the apprentice would then be eligible to take the licensure examinations and be licensed upon their successful completion of the program.” He said the bill originated in part at the request of licensed barbers Daniel Lepper of Concrete Barber in Goshen and Matthew McMillan of Fountain Square Barber Shop in Indianapolis.

Several witnesses described results from Indiana's cosmetology apprenticeship program and urged the committee to extend the model to barbers and nail technicians. Marta Robinson, testifying as a salon owner and program mentor, said apprentices gain early, hands‑on experience in a working salon and that the model has been “transformative.” Robinson told the committee the apprenticeship model in Indiana requires 2,100 hours in her program, compared with roughly 1,500 hours typically covered in traditional beauty schools, and noted federal registered apprenticeships generally require a minimum of 2,000 hours.

Cosmetology apprentices who spoke said the work‑based model let them earn income while learning. Casey Strome, who said she has been “learning and working as a cosmetology apprentice for 8 months now,” described the hands‑on approach as aligned with modern learning styles and said it allowed her to contribute financially to her family while training. Kaley D'Angelo, who identified herself as “Indiana's very first cosmetology apprentice,” said the model allowed her to avoid student debt and enter the workforce with practical experience.

Supporters emphasized that registered apprenticeships are paid. Robinson said programs must pay apprentices and that Department of Labor registration requires programs to document pay; she cited that federal rules require at least two pay raises during an apprenticeship. Robinson also gave a specific wage example from her contract, saying an apprentice would make $15.75 per hour at the end of the apprenticeship. Committee members pressed whether typical cosmetology school tuition—Robinson said most schools in Indiana average around $15,000—was a driver of interest in apprenticeships.

Margaret Ferguson, a licensed cosmetologist and founder of Beyond the Chair, raised concerns raised by stakeholders about removing oversight from the State Board of Cosmetology and Barbers and relying on federal registration. Ferguson said that, in her view, state boards typically focus on public safety and have not historically addressed labor conditions; she told the committee that “apprenticeships... open the doors to better labor protections” because federal registration requires documentation such as social‑security information and wage records. Ferguson also urged adding estheticians to the bill and suggested an apprenticeship representative be added to the State Board of Cosmetology.

Ferguson and other witnesses discussed human‑trafficking risks in the beauty sector and recommended training. A committee member asked whether trafficking awareness training for licensees or apprentices would be appropriate; the committee chair said adding such a requirement might need additional work with the Professional Licensing Agency (PLA) and the U.S. Department of Labor before it could be added as an amendment and that the issue could be studied further.

During debate, one senator said he remained generally supportive but would vote no so concerns could be addressed later; other members expressed support. The recorded roll call for the bill shows the following votes: Senator Niezkowski — yes; Senator Poele — yes; Senator Hundley — no (explained he hoped concerns could be fixed later); Senator Dorio — aye; Senator Alexander — yes; Senator Donnell — yes; Senator Maxwell — yes; Senator Walker — yes; Senator Donato — yes; Senator Zay — yes; Senator Rogers — yes. The chair announced, “Bill passes 10 1.”

The bill as advanced allows Department of Labor‑registered apprenticeship pathways for barbers and manicurists and does not, in the committee discussion, add trafficking‑awareness training or state code language specifying DOL standards; members asked staff to study those options. The committee also heard that apprenticeship programs under federal registration typically require a written and practical examination for final licensure eligibility.

Next steps: the committee moved the bill forward; the record does not show a subsequent engrossment date or second reading schedule in this transcript.