MANAGING SAFETY COMPLIANCE IN THE HAIR & BEAUTY INDUSTRY - WHEN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY BREACHES BECOME MISCONDUCT

Written by Phumzile Eliya

In many establishments, particularly within the hairdressing, cosmetology, beauty, and skincare industry, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) is often treated as a compliance checklist rather than a behavioural standard.

Policies are drafted, rules are posted, and registers are signed, yet when employees fail to follow safety procedures, management in establishments are often left asking: At what point does a safety breach become misconduct?

Equally important is understanding how such misconduct should be addressed in a manner that is fair, consistent, and legally defensible.

This article explores the relationship between OHS compliance and discipline, with a specific focus on:

• When non-compliance becomes misconduct

• The importance of clearly defined rules

• The role of progressive discipline in OHS matters

• Practical application within the hairdressing, cosmetology, skincare, and beauty industry

1. The Legal Foundation: OHS as a Shared Responsibility

The Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 places obligations not only on management in establishments, but also on employees.

In terms of section 14 of the Act, employees are required to:

• Take reasonable care for their own health and safety and that of others

• Obey lawful and reasonable safety instructions

• Comply with establishment safety rules

• Report unsafe conditions and incidents

These duties are not optional; they form part of the employee’s contractual and statutory obligations.

However, a critical point often overlooked in practice is this:

An employee can only be held accountable for a safety rule that is clearly defined, communicated, and understood.

The Act further requires management in establishments to ensure that employees are made aware of hazards and precautionary measures, reinforcing the importance of training and communication before discipline.

2. Defining OHS Rules in the Establishment

For OHS to be enforceable in a disciplinary context, it must move beyond general principles into practical, establishment-specific rules.

2.1 What Must Be Defined

Management in establishments, particularly in the hairdressing, cosmetology, skincare, and beauty industry, should clearly outline:

• Hygiene and sterilisation procedures

• Use of personal protective equipment (PPE)

• Safe handling of tools and chemicals

• Client safety protocols

• Incident and hazard reporting procedures

2.2 Awareness and Proof

Before discipline can be justified, management in the establishment must be able to demonstrate:

• The rule existed

• The rule was reasonable

• The employee was aware of the rule

This is typically supported by:

• Signed policies

• Induction records

• Training attendance registers

Without this foundation, disciplinary action may be challenged as procedurally or substantively unfair.

3. When Does an OHS Breach Become Misconduct?

Not every safety failure automatically constitutes misconduct.

The key question is whether the employee’s conduct was unreasonable in the circumstances.

3.1 Factors to Consider

An OHS breach may amount to misconduct where:

• The employee knew or should reasonably have known the rule

• The rule was lawful and consistently applied

• The breach was negligent, intentional, or reckless

• The conduct created actual or potential risk

3.2 Practical Examples in the Industry

In a hairdressing, cosmetology, skincare, or beauty establishment, misconduct may arise where an employee:

• Fails to sterilise equipment despite clear procedures

• Performs treatments in an unsafe manner

• Ignores hygiene standards that place clients at risk

• Fails to report injuries or hazardous conditions

• Uses equipment contrary to training and instruction

3.3 Degrees of Misconduct

OHS misconduct is not one-dimensional and must be assessed on a spectrum:

• Minor misconduct: Isolated, low-risk, often due to oversight

• Serious misconduct: Repeated or careless non-compliance

• Gross misconduct: Reckless or wilful disregard for safety

This distinction is critical in determining the appropriate sanction.

4. Progressive Discipline in OHS Matters

Discipline should not be punitive by default. Its primary purpose is to correct behaviour and ensure compliance.

The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 supports a system of progressive discipline, particularly in cases that do not involve gross misconduct.

4.1 The Progressive Approach

A typical progression includes:

4.1.1 Counselling / Informal Correction

Appropriate for first-time or minor breaches as it reinforces expectations and correct procedures.

4.1.2 Verbal Warning

Issued where non-compliance continues. Clearly communicates the seriousness of the conduct

4.1.3 Written Warning

Applied where behaviour persists to create a formal record of misconduct

4.1.4 Final Written Warning

Indicates that further misconduct may result in dismissal

4.1.5 Dismissal

Reserved for repeated offences or serious misconduct

4.2 When Progressive Discipline May Not Apply

There are circumstances where progressive discipline is not appropriate.

4.2.1 Gross Negligence or Recklessness

Immediate dismissal may be justified where:

• The employee’s conduct poses a serious risk to health or safety

• There is deliberate disregard for safety procedures

• The misconduct undermines trust and operational safety

4.2.1.1 Industry-Relevant Example

In a hairdressing, cosmetology, skincare, or beauty establishment context:

• Performing a procedure with contaminated tools

• Ignoring electrical safety protocols that could harm a client

Such conduct may justify a severe sanction without prior warnings.

5. Consistency: The Cornerstone of Fair Discipline

One of the most common reasons disciplinary action fails at the CCMA is inconsistency.

If management in establishments:

• Enforce rules selectively

• Ignore similar misconduct by others

• Fail to lead by example,

Then disciplinary action may be deemed unfair.

Consistency requires:

• Uniform application of rules

• Equal treatment of employees

• Management accountability

6. Linking OHS to Establishment Culture

OHS compliance should not exist in isolation; it must form part of the establishment culture.

6.1 Creating a Culture of Accountability

Management in establishments should aim to:

• Encourage reporting of unsafe practices

• Promote shared responsibility

• Reinforce the importance of safety in daily operations

6.2 Employee Buy-In

Employees are more likely to comply when:

• They understand the purpose behind the rules

• They see consistent enforcement

• They feel protected rather than policed

7. Practical Recommendations for Management in Establishments

To effectively manage OHS and discipline, management in establishments should:

• Clearly define establishment-specific OHS rules

• Provide regular training and refresher sessions

• Maintain proper records of training and incidents

• Apply progressive discipline fairly and consistently

• Assess each case based on its merits

• Lead by example at the management level

OHS breaches become misconduct not simply because a rule was broken, but because a known and reasonable standard was disregarded in a manner that creates risk.

Management in establishments must ensure that:

• Rules are clearly defined and communicated

• Employees are properly trained

• Discipline is applied fairly and consistently

Progressive discipline remains a critical tool in managing OHS compliance. However, where conduct is serious or reckless, stronger action may be justified. Ultimately, the objective is not merely to discipline employees but to create an establishment that is safe, compliant, and accountable for both employees and clients alike.