Why Does Every Stylist You Hire Either Quit or Create Drama?
Greg fired his third stylist in six months last week.
"I can't do this anymore," he told me on the phone. He sounded exhausted. "I'm spending more time dealing with staff problems than actually running my salon."
His latest hire had lasted eight weeks. Started great. Then showed up late constantly. Complained about everything. Created drama with other stylists. Finally stopped showing up altogether.
"What am I doing wrong?" he asked.
I've been coaching salon owners for over 25 years. Greg's problem isn't unique. Most salon owners are terrible at hiring. They're reactive. Desperate. They hire anyone with a license who seems decent.
Then they're shocked when it doesn't work out.
Let me show you what's actually happening.
What Made His Last Three Hires Fail?
Greg's first bad hire was someone he found on Indeed. Posted a job listing. Got 40 applications. Picked the one with the most experience.
"She had 10 years in the industry," he told me. "I thought that meant she'd be good."
She lasted three months. Complained the schedule was too rigid. Didn't like the commission structure. Wanted to do her own thing.
"She treated my salon like a booth rental," Greg said. "But she was on commission."
His second hire was a referral from another stylist. "My team member vouched for her," he said. "I trusted that."
She lasted four months. Constant drama. Talked badly about other stylists. Created cliques. Made the workplace toxic.
"My other stylists started quitting because of her," Greg said.
His third hire seemed perfect at the interview. Said all the right things. Talked about being a team player.
Lasted eight weeks. The late arrivals started in week three. The complaining started in week five. By week eight, she ghosted him.
"Didn't even text to quit," Greg said. "Just stopped showing up."
I know another salon owner, Rachel, who had a different hiring problem. She couldn't find anyone at all.
"I've been posting jobs for four months," she told me. "I get maybe two applications a month. Both terrible."
Her salon is in a small town. Limited stylist pool. Everyone knows everyone.
"The good stylists are already working somewhere," she said. "I'm left with people who can't keep a job."
Then there's Marcus. He owns three salons. He'd been hiring constantly for two years.
"I have 18 chairs across three locations," he told me. "I should have 18 stylists. I have 11."
Seven empty chairs. Lost revenue every single day.
"I can't find people fast enough," he said. "And when I do find them, they leave within six months."
His turnover was killing him.
What Actually Changes When You Stop Hiring Desperately?
Greg's problem was he had no process. Someone would quit or get fired. He'd panic. Post on Indeed. Interview whoever applied. Hire the least-bad option.
"I was just trying to fill the chair," he admitted.
"That's your problem," I told him. "You're hiring to fill a chair. Not hiring to build a team."
We rebuilt his entire approach. Started with figuring out what he actually wanted in a stylist.
"I want someone who shows up on time, doesn't create drama, and treats clients well," he said.
"That's baseline," I said. "What else?"
"Someone who wants to grow," he said. "Someone who sees this as a career, not just a job."
That became his filter. Every interview, he asked: "Where do you see yourself in three years? What are you doing to get there?"
Most applicants had no answer. "Uh, I don't know, still doing hair?" they'd say.
One applicant said: "I want to specialize in color corrections. I'm taking online classes. I want to build a reputation as the go-to colorist in this area."
Greg hired her. She's still with him 18 months later. His best stylist.
"That one question changed everything," he told me.
Rachel's problem was different. She wasn't getting applications because her job posts were terrible.
"Seeking experienced stylist. Good pay. Great team. Apply now."
"This tells me nothing," I said when she showed me.
"What should it say?" she asked.
"What makes your salon special?" I said. "Why would someone want to work there instead of somewhere else?"
She thought about it. "We have continuing education every month," she said. "We send stylists to classes. We pay for it."
"Say that," I told her.
She rewrote her post. Talked about education. Career growth. Mentorship. The culture she'd built.
Applications tripled. "But they're better applicants," she said. "People who actually care about growing."
She hired two stylists in the next three months. Both are still with her a year later.
Marcus's turnover problem was about compensation. He was paying straight commission. 50%.
"That's standard," he said when I asked about it.
"Standard doesn't mean good," I told him.
His stylists had no stability. Bad week? Bad paycheck. Slow month? They'd panic and look for other jobs.
"I need them to feel secure," I told him.
We switched him to a hybrid model. Base hourly rate plus commission on everything over a threshold.
"Won't that cost me more?" he asked.
"Maybe," I said. "But you'll save money on turnover. Training new stylists costs way more than paying existing ones a base rate."
He tried it. Turnover dropped 60% in the first year.
"My stylists stopped looking for other jobs," he said. "Because they knew they'd get a paycheck even in slow weeks."
His seven empty chairs? Filled within eight months. Now he has a waitlist of stylists wanting to work for him.
What About the Legal Stuff Nobody Talks About?
Greg got hit with a wage claim six months after firing his second stylist.
"She filed a complaint saying I didn't pay her for training time," he told me. He was panicked.
"Did you pay her for training time?" I asked.
"I didn't know I had to," he said. "She was on commission."
Commission doesn't mean you don't pay for non-productive time. Training. Cleaning. Waiting for clients. All of that is supposed to be paid at minimum wage.
"I owe her $2,400 in back pay," he said. "Plus penalties."
That wake-up call made him fix his payroll system. Now he tracks all hours. Pays for everything.
"It costs me more monthly," he said. "But I'm not getting sued anymore."
Rachel had a different legal problem. She was treating her stylists as independent contractors.
"They're not employees," she insisted. "They set their own hours."
"Do they use your products?" I asked.
"Yes," she said.
"Do they have to follow your service protocols?" I asked.
"Yes," she said.
"Then they're employees," I told her. "Not contractors."
She argued at first. Then talked to an attorney. Found out I was right.
"I had to reclassify everyone," she told me. "And pay back taxes. Cost me $18,000."
Now she does it right. Employees on payroll. Proper taxes withheld.
Marcus learned this lesson early. "I pay everyone as employees," he said. "No independent contractors. Too risky."
Smart.
How Do You Know If Someone's Actually Good?
Greg used to hire based on interviews. "They'd say the right things," he said. "Then turn out to be terrible."
"You can't hire based on talking," I told him. "You need to see them work."
Now he does paid trial days. Brings them in. Has them do services. Watches how they interact with clients and team.
"I can tell in two hours if they're a fit," he said.
One applicant seemed great at the interview. Trial day? Rude to the front desk. Rushed through a consultation. Left her station messy.
"I didn't hire her," Greg said. "Would have been a disaster."
Another applicant was nervous at the interview. But trial day? Incredible with clients. Thorough consultation. Clean technique. Asked good questions.
"Hired her on the spot," Greg said. "She's now one of my best."
Rachel does trials too. "Best change I made," she said.
"I used to hire based on resume and interview," she said. "Now I actually see them work before I decide."
Her bad hires dropped to almost zero.
Marcus does three-day trials. "One day isn't enough for three locations," he said.
Day one: shadow at location one. Day two: work at location two. Day three: full day at location three.
"By day three, I know if they can handle my systems and culture," he said.
He pays them for all three days. "It's worth it," he said. "Cheaper than hiring wrong and firing in two months."
What Happens in the First 90 Days?
Greg used to throw new hires on the floor immediately. "Here's your chair. Here's the booking system. Good luck."
Most quit within three months.
"They were overwhelmed," he realized. "I wasn't training them properly."
Now he has a structured first week. New hires shadow his senior stylists. Learn his consultation process. Get trained on systems. Don't take clients yet.
"They feel supported now," he said. "Instead of thrown to the wolves."
Week two, they start taking clients. But limited. Maybe three a day. He checks in daily.
"How did your consultation go? Did you have questions? What do you need from me?"
By week four, they're up to full capacity. But he still does weekly check-ins.
At 90 days, formal review. "How are you feeling? Where do you want to grow? What can I do to support you?"
His retention after 90 days? 85%. Used to be 40%.
"The first 90 days make or break retention," he told me.
Rachel does something similar. Structured onboarding. Weekly check-ins. 90-day review.
"My stylists tell me they've never felt this supported," she said.
Marcus has a 30-60-90 plan. Clear goals for each milestone.
"By 30 days, you should know our systems. By 60 days, you should be at 70% productivity. By 90 days, full productivity and integrated into the team."
His new hires know exactly what's expected. "No surprises," he said.
What Makes Someone Stay vs. Leave?
Greg asked me this after his retention improved. "Why do stylists stay now when they used to leave?"
"You're treating them like professionals," I said. "Not just chair-fillers."
His stylists now have clear paths for growth. Education opportunities. Performance reviews. Real feedback.
"They see a future here," he said. "Not just a paycheck."
One of his stylists told him: "I stayed because you actually care about my career. Not just your business."
That hit him hard. "I realized I'd been so focused on my salon that I forgot about their careers," he said.
Rachel's stylists stay because of education. "We invest in them," she said. "They feel it."
She sends stylists to classes. Pays for certifications. Brings in educators.
"They know they're growing here," she said. "Why would they leave?"
Marcus's stylists stay because of stability. "The base pay changed everything," he said.
One stylist told him: "I can finally plan my life. I know I'll make enough to pay my bills even in slow weeks."
Security matters. A lot.
Where Do You Actually Find Good Stylists?
Greg stopped posting on Indeed. "I only get desperate applicants there," he said.
Now he focuses on referrals from his existing team. "My best stylists know other good stylists," he said.
He incentivizes referrals. $500 bonus if the referral stays six months. $1,000 if they stay a year.
"My team is picky about who they refer," he said. "Because they have to work with them."
His last three hires? All referrals. All still there.
Rachel can't rely on referrals in her small town. "Not enough stylists," she said.
She focuses on beauty school partnerships. Goes to local schools. Does guest lectures. Builds relationships with instructors.
"I'm recruiting before they even graduate," she said.
She hired two new grads last year. Trained them her way. "They're loyal because I gave them their first chance," she said.
Marcus does both. Referrals and beauty schools. Plus social media.
"I post about our culture constantly," he said. "Instagram. Facebook. LinkedIn."
He shows his team at education events. Celebrating wins. Team outings.
"Stylists see that and want to be part of it," he said.
His last hire found him on Instagram. Reached out directly. "I've been following your salons," she told him. "I want to work there."
Perfect hire. Still with him.
What's the Biggest Mistake You Can Make?
Greg's biggest mistake was hiring out of desperation. "I needed a body in a chair," he said. "I'd hire anyone."
That cost him thousands in turnover. Time training people who'd quit. Drama that drove good stylists away.
"Desperation hiring is expensive hiring," he said now.
Rachel's biggest mistake was terrible job posts. "I was basically invisible," she said.
No applications because nobody knew why they should apply.
Marcus's biggest mistake was straight commission with no security. "My stylists were stressed constantly," he said. "So they left."
All three of them fixed their mistakes. All three now have stable, growing teams.
Greg: 18 months, no turnover, waitlist of applicants.
Rachel: Tripled applications, hired four stylists in 18 months, all still there.
Marcus: 60% drop in turnover, seven empty chairs filled, now has 19 stylists across three locations.
If you're stuck in the cycle of hiring, training, and losing stylists, if you're desperate to fill chairs and it's not working, if your team is creating more drama than revenue, you need to change your approach.
Stop hiring desperately. Start building a salon that good stylists want to join.
