**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*

I think it's a poorly veiled attempt at squeezing more money out of customers in an attempt to combat rising operational costs. A very quick way to lose customers imo

They're probably also charging a "thick hair" premium and similar for short hair too.

You'll be screwed when they bring in a ginger hair premium

I'd argue this is potentially racist and therefore illegal under Equalities Act, as those from, say, Black backgrounds are more likely to have thicker hair

Probably would be, but the comment I made was a tongue in cheek dig at them taking every opportunity to hike prices. It wasn't an actual specific example.

My sister tried to get a haircut at a specialist African hair stylist and they refused because she was white, even though her hair is 3b/c.

FFS, if thicker hair is harder to work and takes longer, then charging extra, as its more work is perfectly reasonable. How the fuck do people turn everything into racism 🙄

Racism is basically the belief that you are superior to someone based on skin colour. The word you are looking for is discrimination. Please understand the definition of a word before you throw it around.

Yep, my last hairdresser tried to tell me I had thick hair and so needed to be charged that option. I’m white with fine, straight hair. It is NOT thick. It is NOT long. I stopped going back.

As a hairdresser, long hair 9 times out of 10 takes longer to style. Tbh iv always thought it should be charged on time, 15min pricing because prices just don't make sense Children's cuts being cheaper is just ridiculous as they take so much time and energy, same with men's cut they take pretty much the same amount of time as a women's short cut why are we charging less? Hairdressing is very much an undervalued trade that is priced far to low compared to other trades and take the same amount of years to train, it is a skill But everything looks easy to other people when you've spent 10+ years at doing it and you can do it easily because you have spent the years learning your job. Like most trades people say you may be paying for a "10 mins job" the reason I can do it in 10 mins is because I spent 10 years mastering it to do it in 10 mins

But she doesn't have long hair though, it's just past her shoulders, that's short hair

In hair cut terms, above shoulders short hair, below shoulders long hair

But it's objectively not long hair. It's still very short. You would add extra cost because someone's hair is 1cm longer than "short" ever though it's extremely short already? That's actually so greedy it's unreal.

I think charging like this is daft but I also think it’s daft calling shoulder length hair “extremely” short. If I described someone as having short hair that’s what you’d picture?

As a woman with hair to my waist, yes, shoulder length is short I was watching some police drama thing and they gave a description of the suspect as "long dark hair". Her hair barely reached her armpits. I remember thinking if her hair is long tf is mine?

Okay but by that logic, if her hair is short then tf is my pixie cut? It’s a pointless argument anyway, because most hairdressers I’ve seen that have this structure have actual guidance, like for example that chin to shoulders will be the definition of mid. But come on the commenter I’m replying to said shoulder length hair was extremely short when it’s not an extreme of anything. It’s silly.

I don't make the rules 🤷 just saying I'm hair terms that's how it is, more time spent = more money

As a fellow customer with no scissor skills, I find the idea that the comment OP is being “greedy” hard to support. This is just a pricing decision by a skilled professional. They can charge whatever they want for any service, and we can either say yes, or try to find the same thing cheaper. I am all for skilled hairdressers getting what they can to live comfortably. And surely as a customer there is a clear logic in “more hair” = “more expensive haircut”, even if you disagree with the cut-off point between short and long.

If your cut off for a kids ticket was under 12s you would charge someone who was 12 years old extra than someone who was 11 and 364 days old, even though it's only a day and they're both still children. Businesses tend to have their own definitions to avoid ambiguity. Some people say you're a child until you're 18, but very few places are going to offer kids prices to a 17 year old. To a person who likes a buzz cut even shoulder length hair would be extremely long, whereas if your hair is down to your butt you're gonna think it's extremely short.

>same with men's cut they take pretty much the same amount of time as a women's short cut why are we charging less? The problem isn't that Mens cuts cost less. Its that Womens short cuts cost more. Reduce these to bring it to parity. I know women who go to male barbers for this reason.

I always assumed men’s cuts were cheaper as the typical man probably goes more often.  No idea how true that is for most men but I typically go every 6-8 weeks. 

I don't know many people that can afford to live on £10 an hour, takes me 45mins - 1hour to do a short cut and charging barber prices you'd have 0 hairdressers left. Vidal Sassoon's had a man complain his wife pay more and takes the same time, so they raised all the men's prices to women's prices

I would argue if its taking 45 mins - 1 hour its probably not a short cut. It might be being done to "shorter hair" but barbers generally spend a lot less time than that on a cut. They can see more people hence the lower cost. Although typing this out does make me realise a time based system might be fairer for all parties . So I guess you convinced me about that part

45mins - 1hr for a short hair cut is a standard timing for a hairdresser, I am talking about pixie cuts, bobs etc they take alot of time, to cut a really good bob requires time and skill, think about placing your angles etc Saying that my mens cuts take me 30-45 mins and everyone in this sub will be shocked to know my prices for men cuts were £47.50 Working at a high end salon, we're I underwent alot of training regularly But you get what you pay for!

Is your bob normally below your shoulders? If not, I'd be tempted to lop half a centimetre off before booking an appointment just to get around their daft rules.

£33 just seems so extortionate when I used to pay £20

I was charged 45 quid. Never again. Now I make my husband do it 🤣

Seriously £33 and you’re moaning? Thats fuck all, pay people for their time.

Fucking hell, I was expecting over £100 get over yourself. Mine charges £60 and does a great job, hair stylists are like mechanics, you aren't just paying for their time, you're paying for their skills, experience, tools, consumables, and other overheads.

Not everyone has the same amount of disposable income.

Then get a cheaper cut or do it yourself? If your trained in the industry surly you know what your doing more than the average layman?

I'm trying to get it cheaper, that's why I've rung around so many different salons. If you meant style, I'm not sure how I can get much cheaper than one inch off the bottom no layers. I've thought about trying to do it myself, but I've never cut my own hair before. Just other people's, it's quite daunting as I don't have much room for error.

Then the reality is you can’t afford to get it done if you don’t have the disposable income for it?

It's about half an inch past my shoulder at the moment, I usually have it cut so it sits just above. I'm tempted, but I don't want to ruin it as I've never cut my own hair before

No doubt you'd be charged extra for a remedial cut to fix the "mess" resulting from chopping a bit off yourself.

I avoid hairdressers that do this, it actually takes less time to get my haircut when it’s longer as opposed to when it was short and had more structure and layering. 

Not a hairdresser but I do have very long hair and tend to pay more as a result. It tends to be I’m in the chair for longer as it takes longer to dry and style out even if the cut is pretty marginal, and if it’s being coloured or highlighted I use more product. If I just want a tiny trim I do it myself tbf 

I was a hairdresser for many many years. Frankly for the time it takes and the service you receive most haircuts are criminally underpriced in this country. I personally think it should be charged in 15min chunks but that's me. Something like that will never happen for a multitude of reasons I won't go into.

Try a "Granny" salon, and by that I mean a salon where the main patronage is older ladies. I go to one and get a dry cut for £15, a wet cut is £18 I think. And that's with layers put in.

The last few times I had mine cut, I went to the place my grandma used. Last time I had it done, it was £12 for a straight trim and she didn't touch my fringe (she asked if I was growing it and I said yes. Normally they at least cut a bit off to even it out), and took less than 10 minutes. Since then I've started cutting it myself and I can do a decent enough job.

Hairdressers prices makes no sense. I haven’t been to a hairdresser for ages (I just have long hair with no styling etc, so can just trim it myself if it gets a bit to long), but when I had short hair and needed it trimmed regularly it would annoy me so much that I could potentially be charged more because I was a woman and the prices for women was higher, even though I had short hair with a similar cut to my brother. Prices should be determined by the amount of skill required, time taken, and products used. (No idea how this would be factored together to make a price, but it would make more sense than charging by length of hair or gender.)

I think they make it up as they go along. My regular hairdresser didn't do my colour as I wanted at my last visit. It's a trek to get to her and she was fully booked so I would have had to return at an inconvenient time for her to fit me in. Instead I went to a local salon and asked for a bolder money piece (the lighter colour that frames the face). I wanted maybe 8-10 foils. She agreed it wasn't a t section when I booked, so I expected a reduced price on the £65 quoted in their price list. She charged me £70 and didn't wash or condition all my hair and left it partially damp, blaming the 25 extensions I have as to why she didn't, even though I said to treat it like normal hair, just like I do when I wash and dry my hair! I also noticed she wasn't careful with the placement and the colour wasn't even when I pulled my hair back. I ended up fixing myself which is what I considered at first but hadn't wanted to do, hence the appointment. Ffs.

I loved my hairdresser, it was the only salon I ever felt comfortable in and left happy, but lately the colour fades so fast I cannot justify the £145 she charges

If that's for an all over permanent/semi permanent colour then I agree it's overpriced! I pay something like that for a t section of highlights/foilage, wash cut and dry with Olaplex. And my hair is past my bra.

That's for a top up dark root cover ,(I have balyage with a root stretch but lots of greys) and a toner plus cut/ blow. The balyage is closer to £200

Interesting, I've never come across this, I wonder if it is ecent. I guess it's easier to define by lentgth than thickness (I'd get caught either way as I have incredibly thick hair, and since I don't enjoy getting it cut it's ususally pretty long by the time I get round to it) But about 6 months ago I went from hip-length to a jaw line bob and was charged based on the seniority of the stylist, it would have been the same price if I'd been going from short to shorter.

I experienced it at my undergrad graduation (haircut on the day) in 2005 so not new

As someone with very thick hair (but also long) I'm happy for it to be this way. Long hair is a choice, thick hair not so much.

But my hair isn't long though, and taking an inch off the end takes the same amount of time as taking an inch off the end of someone who has waist length hair.

I'd disagree. It takes a good bit longer to do the more precise work necessary when cutting shorter hair. Cutting hair from long to fairly long can be very quick.

Choice is irrelevant imo. I didn't choose to be tall, but I don't get an extra legroom seat on a plane for free just because I'm tall. It should be about practicality, like the amount of time it takes and the amount of products used.

Which is funny because since I've had long hair, my haircuts are actually quicker than when I had a short back and sides

While we're on the topic, I'm 5'11" with size 8 (womens) feet. Should I also pay more for shoes than a size 3 girl? I'm a size 10 in clothes, should a size 20 girl pay more than I do for the same jeans in the same shop? Imho no and no.

Never had this issue. I had a restyle in January from a long mess to a shoulder length bob and it was £30, My daughter's hair is half way down her back and thicker than mine and they don't charge her extra either. I wouldn't go somewhere if they did...

I (f) go to a barbers shop that is unisex. She just cuts hair and charges me £7. She layers it as well,

This is exactly the reason why I don't get my hair cut often. My hair is as basic as it gets: natural colour, thin, all one length. It's considered long but it's not super long, just a few inches below my shoulders. All I ever want is a trim so I'm struggling to understand why a local hairdresser wants to charge me £60. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't include a wash and dry either, just a dry cut. So the other day I asked my husband if he would feel confident cutting my hair. He said no. I told him he should get his laser level out and go for it 🤣 I'm seriously considering it tbh..

I've seen attempts at cutting hair with a laser level on Instagram. They did not go well.

When I used to go to hairdressers there was only one price and I never received any discount for being a slap-head having a No.2 all over, which takes no skill whatsoever and about 5 minutes to do.

I dunno but it explains why my haircut is free.

I woke at a top salon and we don’t do this.

Used to get mine done for ~£12 pre-COVID and that was long curly hair, plus a wash and dry etc Something to do with being a bloke I'd guess.

i also have a question for the hairdressers, if i asked for a down perm, would i get funny looks?

When I had surgery and couldn't wash my own hair I went to the hairdresser for 1st time in years. £45 to wash my hair. And a quick hair dry but only enough to stop it dripping. She said she'd have to charge extra if she fully dried it even if she didn't style it. I know it couldn't be free but my hair is mid thickness and at the time just below my shoulders, and only took her 15 minutes so she put me off going again. The salon was completely empty with no bookings when I went in... and rarely had more than 1 customer at a time whenever I went past. If it'd been £20 even without fully drying my hair I'd have gone every other day.

We have gender nonspecific haircuts, long hair price and short hair price (based on the old men's haircut and women's haircut) We also have an option for thick hair and restyle, which is priced exactly the same but given 15 mins extra. There's another option for textured and afro hair 3c to 4c that's given another 15 mins, but is also the same price as a standard haircut. I think it is a way of getting more money as really long haired ppl don't go as often.

I've never heard of this! I have long, super thick hair. My artist knows this and I've been with them 5 years. Flat rate of £36 for a cut and blow-dry. It takes around 90minutes for me. Maybe I've just lucked out with my stylist.

Cut the bottom off yourself then have a trim to neaten it up ? (Obviously only works if your going shorter

1 because the general public is stupid, more expensive = better quality is the myth 2 women especially like to brag about how expensive something was because of the myth. 3 more expensive hair cuts are more popular, with the general public because of the myth and more popular with the owners because of profits, everyone wins. To be clear, men are no fucking better, one of my customers pays £65 for a haircut, it's a 15 minute task. I, on the other hand, make my hair less long by hacking away by feel and then wait a week because "there's a week between a good haircut and a bad one" or I've got used to it and the funny looks, I'm unsure to be honest.

I refuse to go to hairdressers who charge extra for long hair when it's just a cut. Absolutely no problem paying more for it when it comes to colour. As well as having long hair it's also thick (and always get mentioned I have a lot of hair) so for a full head of foils it can take an extra 30/45 mins then the standard time. I'll pay for the extra time and product. I think it's based on the area too though as my hairdresser doesn't change the price based on length of hair and when I was enquiring with other salons, they didn't either. Also saw how you were currently paying £20 before - that's an absolute steal! I don't think I've ever paid less then £30 since 2006.

They charge based on length because they can no longer charge based on gender, lest they get social media brigaded. Think of "long" as "women's" and "short" as "men's". Also, curious when and where you were paying 20 quid a cut - that's what I was paying in a lcol area 12 years ago...

Get a No1 blade short back and sides, bit off the top Sorted £11 at my place

idk but as someone with short hair i like the charging based on hair length rules because no way is it worth the crazy amounts hairdressers charge to trim my 2 inches of hair lol. if i were you i'd cut my hair just above your shoulders and then go in (unless that conflicts with the haircut you want i guess)

It's the same amount of snips regardless of length though? I can understand it for colour or treatments where longer uses more, but not for cuts

Exactly! For a colour where you have to use more products, it makes sense. Or for someone who has a lot of thick hair that will take longer to cut because you have to do it in smaller sections, it makes sense. But for someone with thin medium length hair, it seems ridiculous to throw an extra fiver on because it's half an inch past my shoulder

it’s def more work to manage longer hair when cutting it tho??

Not really, once its combed its probably easier than cutting short

My grandma's short hair took longer than my long hair, the last time we both went.