President Donald J. Trump (photo courtesy of Shutterstock.com).
This feature is the third installment of our continuing coverage of the May 4, 2026 meeting of the Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology (LSBC).
Our first feature, published on May 11, 2026, focused on Board Member Jean Pitre’s near-panic plea for cosmetology schools to flood the U. S. Department of Education with reasons they contend that a “Gainful Employment” provision should be removed from an addition to President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill passed in 2025. That provision establishes earnings accountability for students in order for students to qualify for Federal Pell Grant funding to pay for their cosmetology instruction.
Today’s feature focuses on comments received by the U. S. Department of Education and where the matter stands at present. First, however, we want to provide a short video clip of Pitre’s admission of how small the number of hours that a cosmetology school graduate works is and the average earnings of those graduates. Here’s Pitre’s commentary in a 32-second video segment of his entire presentation:
5/11/26: Pitre reveals that Louisiana cosmetologists make “$15,000 – $16,000” and adds that the average cosmetologist works “part time at 25 hours a week.”
Pitre clearly articulated the numbers! Is it any wonder so many organizations concerned with gainful employment and holding cosmetology schools accountable with such abysmal earnings given that the student has to attend school for 1,500 hours at a cost of $14,000 – $20,000 plus to obtain the ability to make such enormous earnings?
Regarding comments that the U. S. Department of Education received on the provision as it pertains to cosmetology instruction, our sources indicated that, “concerns were expressed about the fact that tipped income component of cosmetology services would not be included in the reported numbers.” Our sources also inform us that, “the Education Department performed an analysis of the claim” and concluded that, “tipped income incorporation wouldn’t meaningfully change many fail rates for cosmetology schools.”
The final rule is expected in the coming weeks or months in the early summer of 2026. The rule is likely to take effect beginning July 1, 2026, or 27 days from the publication of this feature. Data reporting, warnings to students, and potential loss of eligibility would be phased in based on earnings data.
The U. S. Department of Education’s analysis in the proposed rule projects high failure rates for many cosmetology programs under the earnings test and, as Pitre pointed out in his full version video (available at the May 11, 2026 feature link above), upwards of 90 percent of cosmetology schools will be at risk of closing as a result of taxpayers, who are footing the bill for these sky-high tuition fees to yield, by Pitre’s own admission, a “25-hour-a week part-time job making $15,000 – $16,000 a year.”
What’s the ultimate irony of the cosmetology schools shedding all these tears now? Well, ironically, as evidenced by this letter drafted by Veteran’s Educational Access dated May 20, 2026 to U. S. Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon, it was the cosmetology schools which made all of this possible by suing the U. S. Department of Education in the first place (and losing in Federal Court)! From the letter:
We, the 19 undersigned organizations working on behalf of students, consumers, veterans, service members, faculty and staff, civil rights, and college access urge the U.S. Department of Education to enact regulations that strengthen accountability in higher education and protect both students and taxpayers from low-quality programs.
We support the Department’s efforts to implement a consistent, commonsense accountability framework that ensures students and taxpayers receive positive returns from their investments in higher education.
We strongly support the Department’s application of the earnings metric for non-degree programs through its existing gainful employment statutory authority and urge the Department to maintain it in the final rule.
This estimate echoes a 2023 study that found most certificate-granting institutions left more than half of their students earning less than their peers with only a high school diploma. Low earnings and poor employment outcomes are of particular concern at for-profit, predominantly certificate granting colleges. The same study found that nearly three in four certificate-granting for-profit institutions leave the majority of their students earning less than the typical high school graduate, even ten years after enrollment.
As it noted in the proposed rule, the Department possesses clear legal authority to apply earnings metrics to non-degree programs in these regulations using the gainful employment authority. As the Department recognized in the proposed rule, a federal district court in American Assoc. of Cosmetology Sch. v. Dep’t of Educ.,2 affirmed that the Higher Education Act provides the Department authority to issue earnings metrics pursuant to gainful employment statutory language. Critically, the judge in that case held that the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo does not preclude the Department from issuing rules consistent with the plain meaning of “gainful employment.”3 In determining the plain meaning of that term, the judge agreed with the
Trump Administration that “gainful employment” means training that is profitable for students—programs that “actually train and prepare postsecondary students for jobs that they would be less likely to obtain without that training and preparation.”4
So, we guess the moral of that episode is to be careful charging headstrong into Federal Court because in engaging in such an action, when the Plaintiff loses, unintended consequences can arise such has clearly transpired in this matter!
Again, from the letter, let’s take a look at the 19 organizations which drafted the above letter:
AFT: Education, Healthcare, Public Services
American Association of University Women (AAUW)
Community Service Society of New York
Debt Collective
EdTrust
Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP)
NAACP
National Association for College Admission Counseling
New America Higher Education Policy Program
Partnership for College Completion
Project on Predatory Student Lending
Protect Borrowers
Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
The Institute for College Access and Success
United States Student Association
University of California Student Association (UCSA)
UnidosUS
Veterans Education Success
Young Invincibles
We find the above list to be very intriguing, and we draw particular attention to the NAACP and the Project on Predatory Student Lending. Organizations like this would not have drafted a letter of this nature if they had not seen the evidence from members about the havoc wreaked upon unsuspecting students who entered these for-profit schools dreaming to derive a genuinely rewarding career in cosmetology only to find out that the only ones to profit from their enrollment was the schools themselves!
We strongly salute President Trump for his steadfast stand that Federal taxpayer funds will be provided to these schools if and only if they demonstrate they provide a positive return on investment to taxpayers and the students they purport to benefit (but we contend are only interested in benefitting themselves with little or no regard for whether the student is ever able to repay the Federal loan).
Now that President Trump has clearly demonstrated his firm grasp on the need for these schools to demonstrate positive returns for students, it’s time for Gov. Landry to take a hint too. We contend that when Gov. Jeff Landry and House Rep. Mike Johnson actively opposed reducing cosmetology hours from 1,500 to 1,000, Landry clearly demonstrated that he was as out-of-touch with President Trump as he was with the legacy lawsuits entailing the oil industry in Louisiana (which he’s now conveniently seeking settlements as fast as possible now that Trump prevailed at the U. S. Supreme Court level on that issue).
Prior to Landry’s efforts, we previewed the bill to reduce the hours from 1,500 to 1,000 on May 7, 2024. Interestingly enough, let’s reproduce the lead photo of that article since the first young lady (appearing far left) has now become a very interesting player in this whole matter:
May 6, 2024 Cosmetology Board meeting at which Erin Marcaeaux (far left), then with Paul Mitchell School of Cosmetology, would voice her strong opposition to doing as Texas has done and reducing the hours for obtaining a cosmetology license from 1,500 to 1,000.
Incredibly, which school has screamed the loudest and even provided the stats of “up to 92 percent of for-profit schools” closing if the earnings accountability (a/k/a Gainful Employment provision) remains? Well, that would be none other than Paul Mitchell School of Cosmetology. Who knows? Perhaps Marceaux saw the potential future for schools like Paul Mitchell and decided to pursue a safer and more stable position of being a governmental bureaucrat pulling in $75,000 a year to “regulate” the industry!