The Billings City Council is proposing an ordinance to license massage therapy and bodywork businesses.

THIS proposal is extremely destructive to bodywork practitioners not licensed by the state of Montana as massage therapists.

Read the proposal with our critique.

Here is the broad brush analysis: The city is trying to close a loophole that would let bad actors re-brand themselves as bodywork to escape having to apply for an establishment license.

To close the loophole they re-define several massage therapy terms to include all types of bodywork.

Here are just some of the ramifications of the proposal:

• Re-defining the definitions (massage facility, massage or massage therapy, and massage therapist) to include bodyworkers puts them in jeopardy of being prosecuted for practicing massage therapy without a license. Legally practicing bodyworkers are now told that what they do is massage, their business is a massage facility, and they themselves are called massage therapists – thus violating one of the provisions that keeps them being prosecuted under the state massage therapy laws. To qualify for an exemption in state law, bodyworkers cannot imply that they are doing massage (MCA 37-33-404(5)(b)(ii)). These new definitions now classify them as massage. Here are the ramifications for this:
  First, Many legally practicing bodyworkers will be put out of business because professional requirements for that profession do not meet the educational requirements outlined in the state laws and rules.
  Second, For those who might qualify to get a state license, this puts an additional financial and regulatory burden on them
  
  
• Re-defining these definitions creates confusion for the public. Under this proposal unlicensed Bodyworkers are confused with licensed massage therapists. It creates a public safety issue as the public does not know who is state licensed as a massage therapist and who is not. 
  Re-defining these definitions could also allow the rampant unlicensed practice of massage, which is a public safety issue because it would allow bad actors to claim they are performing massage or put up “massage” signs and not be subject to state enforcement because they can claim that they are following Billings’ law. Even though state law supersedes local law, it is complaint driven, so it is unlikely to be enforced. The public will assume that these bad actors are licensed by the state and they are not – a safety issue.
  This provision will also allow traffickers (and prostitutes) to get rid of the expense of having to comply with state licensing. Since they can still call what they do massage, they won’t have to get the state license.
  
  
• Provisions scattered throughout the proposal require that massage therapists must have a license to practice as is required in the state massage therapy practice act. Bodyworkers exempt in state law do NOT meet this requirement and therefore cannot get the license, meaning that they can’t practice under these provisions.
  

Generally there’s just a lot of confusion between who’s licensed and who is not and who would have to get the license. As you can see here, it’s not clear and can seem to conflict.
That’s our point.