|
Kent:
The Ohio reg's state that "Operators are responsible to ensure customer owned eyewear is also sanitized prior to use" and I have the following comments.
1. That is CLEARLY an unreasonable requirement and I will write a letter of protest to the Ohio Department of Cosmetology. The fact of the matter is that no tanning salon owner in ANY state can "force" the OWNER of the eyewear device (the client) to do anything with it. IF the State of Ohio wants this provision to be enforced, they must pass a law that "requires" the citizens of Ohio do give them to you for sanitizing. This is yet another example of a bureaucracy acting outside of the scope of their authority.
2. In the meantime, turn lemons into lemonade and set up an area for clients to "sanitize" their eyewear.
FYI, this issue is like where various states have tried to make the salon owner "responsbile" for making sure that the tanner actually "uses" eyewear while tanning. Unless and until the state passes a law "authorizing" tanning salons to install "peep holes" and to "violate" the tanners privacy, a tanning salon owner can obviously not "verify" that they are, in fact, using protective eyewear.
All that can be done in regard to both of these issues is to make a "best effort" to assure compliance.
Hope this helps.
Don
|