SKIN TESTING , virtually no one I know is skin testing colour every visit; and therefore can not be sure that they are insured in the event of a claim as they are not following the manufacturers instructions, and therefore not following the law on " duty of care". someone has got to get the insurance companies to state clearly under what circmstances they will accept a claim. For example if one tested on first visit, but not again provided the client returns regularly say every 6 to 8 weeks. It needs lots of presure from the trade to get some insurance company to be first to offer a clear statement of what circumstances are accepted for a claim to be paid. ( excuse spelling etc, lunch hour.) somerset Bill
My college are quite up on this...every new client HAS to have askin test, and if a client comes in for a colour and its been more than 6 weeks we re-do the skin test. I always make sure I do them, even on my family. I have the little Colour Start tattoos skin tests, they are invaluable.
But I must say, when I took out mu PLI, skin tests were never even mentioned...quite bad really isnt it???
HI Lisa, skin testing is a mess, I too give clients generic sachet tests to take home for their next visit, however take a look at the instructions in the colour box, no mention of its ok to do a generic (tattoo type,) test; so you and I are NOT following the manufacturers instructions, so in a court, following an unfortunate skin reaction, you will be accused of not following your legal " duty of care" we didnt follow the instructions in the box. I believe what we are doing, would show some measure of duty of care and therefore hopefully reduce the considerable financial costs of being taken to court. Skin testing law is a mess, see my other posting on the subject. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR TRAINING Bill
hi, has'nt asking clients to come in a couple of days before a colour, met with resistance from clients themselves ? Or are you offering the take home patch tests ? Bill
hi,im looking 4 other salons reactions to the skin testing debate,weve always skin tested 48 hrs b4 a colour and lost a lot of walk-in trade because of it,but the thought of trying to get the client 2 remember 2 apply the tatoo skin test or come in for it 2 be applyed,fills me with dread as sometimes people can hardly remember their appointments,let alone skin tests.i was wondering if anyone could let me know if this was having a negative effect on colour trade as sometimes clients find it hard to see we are doing it for them too!
in an ideal world every salon would be doing the same,so you wouldnt fear your disgruntled client going off down the road to the next salon when she'd forgotten to do her test.
my college does skin test on everyone 48 hours before even on clients that had had colours before in the salon but alot of the people who i no want to get a colour they dont like to have to come in 48 hours before as sometimes hard for them to get here to get it done but no skin text in our salon there will be no colour
A debate that has gone on for years the skin test. Bill is correct by not follwoing the instructions supplied by the manufacturer any legal action by clients would be hard to mitigate. Remeber the skin test should replicate the chemical oxidation reaction that takes part when tint is applied to an unprotected scalp. Always record the skin test and have signagtures from the client and member of staff who undertook the test. Remeber YOUR COSHH assessment should make refrence to the skin test and its methdology. (By this I dont mean the COSHH booklet issued by the manufacturers).Personally I have always insisted on skin testing 48 hours before the client has the colour, regardless of the past history and length of time elapsed since the last test .One word of warning I have seen a positive reaction on a client using the same tint as her last visit 6 weeks earlier and a skin test was not performed. The results were horrifying and an out of court settlement had to be made. In this litigious society the rules are: record everything - that applies to all safety docs even if you have less than 5 employees. its is so much easier to defend. Finally any Insurance company will do everythinhg they can to avoid paying compensation -the loss adjusters are red hot at spotting a lack of WRITTEN EVIDENCE. Many salons I know just say I will worry about it when it happens. Scary really.
Vist my website www.cahst.co.uk to see the slon safety management sytems I can offer.
I have been in Hairdressing 25 years, and this debate has intensified with every year, as has the number of positive reactions.
I took some advice on skin testing 19 years ago. The answer I had from the legal profession is simple "skin test or be prosecuted".
Since then I have reviewed this advice and the answer is now very simple.
Under Health & Safety law you have to take due care. There is now a medically recognised test that applies the a known amount of PPD (the chemical most likely to cause an allergic reaction in colour). As thie tatoo based test has a medically recognised amount of the known toxin not using it means that as a hairdresser you are not taking due care, therefore you are negligent, and can get prosecuted under H&S legislation. Following manufacturers instructions can not ensure enough of the toxin is on the skin.
The manufacturers hate this test as they know it is raising the profile of the problem, lets face it they do not want to tell the world that their colours contain a highly toxic substance.
The tatoo based company used to advertise in HJ that they even underwrite the users of their products, (don't know if they still do).
I do know that it takes forty eight hours to have a cellular based allergic reaction, therefore anyone applying a colour and having an instant reaction is having a irritant reaction, (basic level 3 theory guys!).
So if you don't want to get prosecuted under H & S law apply a skin test every time you do a colour, sell your professionalism over your competitors that do not test. Educate your clients, make them feel you care and they will work around 48 hours. Likewise this will raise the profile in your area and clients who may have slapped a colour on at home will understand the risks and come and discuss.
By the way I do not work for a testing company, I am just a passionate hairdresser that tries to raise our professional profile by getting educated and passing that on to my clients.
Why are you so bothered about someone elses colours if you do not use them. So what your telling me aswell is that the patch you left your client in the first place will get used. I don't think so. You need to think on how to combat "cowboys" in this industry who do not give skin tests like mobile hairdressers (some) and other salons in the UK. I would never put the clients health in any risk. I know some salons who have tried colourstart and ditched it within weeks. So my friend, what may be bright eyed for you may not be for others.
Thought you might all be interested to hear that BBC's One Show is running an item on hair colorants, and in particular PPD and allergic reactions on the show tonight (May 14th). It sounds like the feature will predominantly be focussing on home colourants, but there could be some interesting information as well as quotes from Chris Flowers of the CTPA.
It may also be of interest to look at the Daily Mail Thursday 14 May (Page 60) looking at how to make colouring safer for home hair colouring kits.
Screening clients before a colour application is professional easy and indeed safer. Keep hair colour professional - keep it in the Salon!
Brian Plunkett MIT