There are elements of this bill I support, however the overwhelming majority of the professions listed in the bill should require licensing.
Would you support the idea I proposed with tack with the ideas that you believe need licensing to have a maximum requirement as it is often clear that occupational licensing laws are used to restrict future entrants?
I'm not sure that's exactly a process we should be regulating. I feel as though these industries have a set required # of hours of training/licensing for reasons not related to excluding newcomers.
These industries don't have a set number of hours, though. The government does, which is why licenses are required. The only role that industry might have had in licensing requirements is expensive lobbying, which does exclude new workers and businesses in favor of people who've worked in these industries longer.
Before this body rejects the bill wholesale, I think that opponents of it should have the opportunity to list which of the occupations listed should not have licensing requirements and why. Why should a hair stylist need the same kind of certification that lawyers or doctors have to work in their profession, if there is little to no risk of injury involved?
