Why is it more expensive for a long-haired woman to have a haircut than a short-haired woman?

[DowntonNappy]

I'm a bit annoyed.

I've spent the last half hour calling round hairdressers (mobile and salons) for quotes on how much it would be for me and dd to have our hair cut. They gave us a price, then said "but it's an extra £3-£6 dearer if your hair's past your shoulders."

I argued that i'm literally just after a trim for the both of us. Why should it cost us more to get less than an inch off my hair, as opposed to a short-haired woman wanting a crop cut ( or several inches off their hair).

They couldn't give me a straight answer. "That's just the way it is."

So I thought I'd ask on here.

for a trim I've never been charged extra.

but I'm very precious about my hair and the salons I visit are ridiculous prices anyway.

Have you tried further out?

Usually a re-style costs more a trim is cheaper in my experience.

I thought it was due to the washing/drying time taken

I gave up with places that charge extra based on length/thickness after being quoted more at one place supercuts than toni & guy!!!

I have long hair... I walk in to our local unisex barbers with my DH and DD. We're usually done within an hour, it costs £15 for all three of us to have our hair trimmed and they do a really good job!

Yep, I've tried several in my own town, then a fair few in the city centre (a train ride away).

They all seem to have the same idea. I think it's a bit unfair. I'm not looking to get it washed or anything, just a trim to get shot of the dead ends. I don't understand why this would be dearer than someone with short hair looking to get 2-3 inches from theirs.

Supercuts is ridiculously overpriced, sausagesandwich. I saw prices on the window yesterday. I thought, "Bargain!". Went in to get trimmed and they said "You do actually know it will be £XX instead, don't you, because your hair's so long?"

I pointed out the price on their window, she took me outside and showed me there was an asterix next to it. "That's just for people with short hair".

I could have afforded it, but it's the principle of the matter. Also, I'm a stubborn old boot.

I always figured it was because long hair needed cutting less often so it was an extra fee to make up for that, but I'm a cynic.

That's absolutely bonkers! Surely any extra time spent washing hair would be offset by the time saved while cutting it - short hair is more fiddly and requires greater skill.