Tag:

Menstrual Leave

By Parika Singh

The Karnataka government’s proposal to allocate 6 days of menstrual leave per year for women in the public and private sector will reopen debate and discussions on its requirement in the workplace. The absence of National Legislation in India that provides for menstrual leaves to working women is a pivotal indicator of the status accorded to women’s issues and needs in parliament. 77 years after independence, we have three other states- Bihar, Kerala, and Orissa, and a handful of private companies such as Swiggy, Zomato, Magzter, etc, which have taken steps to acknowledge and extend support for this universal biological phenomenon.

Each month a woman’s uterus undergoes a range of complex physiological changes through which the outer lining thickens to prepare and preserve a fertilized embryo and an egg travels down the fallopian tube. For a process so intrinsically linked to the existence and evolution of the human species, it scarcely receives its due significance in society. On the contrary, Indian society, particularly in rural areas, attaches a stigma of impurity to it- shunning women to dark corners of their homes, further attributing to the misinformation surrounding menstruation. So, what exactly happens during a period?

To shed the excess lining, the uterus contracts and relaxes itself periodically to remove the lining, which travels through the cervix and out of the vagina. Blood, tissue, and nutrients leave a woman’s body every month sometimes leading to nutritional deficiencies such as anemia. Hormonal changes involved can affect mental health and stress levels, and the contractions can be severe enough to impact daily activities. According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), USA, 84.1% of women experience some form of pain during the menstrual cycle from mild to acute with every 1 in 10 women finding it debilitating, especially those who suffer from Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS), Endometriosis, or Uterine Fibroids.

And yet, we cannot come up with a national policy that accedes the option to avail one or two days leave in an entire month to rest. Worse, we question it.

Women in key public positions such as former Women and Child Welfare Minister Smriti Irani opposed a legal framework around menstrual leave and considered it a private affair that need not be discussed with employers, perpetuating a sense of shame or embarrassment that gets ingrained in teenagers and prevents open conversations and awareness. Prominent journalist Barkha Dutt called the idea ‘paternalistic and silly’ while at the same time noting the reduction of women in the workforce, lack of access to basic menstrual hygiene products in rural India, and absence of girls from school during their period- ironically all the reasons why such leave is crucial for the health, safety, and upliftment of women in the country.

The Supreme Court this year, while asking the Centre “to look into the matter at a policy level” acknowledged the role it would play in encouraging more women to seek employment. At the same time, it reiterated the regressive stand taken by opponents that it would prevent employers from hiring women. For a constitutional court that aims to promote social justice and protect the fundamental rights of life and equality of opportunity at the workplace, this statement was disappointing, to say the least. Any accommodations granted for the well-being of employees could be inconvenient for employers, and every concession could lead to a potential loss in income. Does that mean all welfare laws should be suspended because of the fear of potential hiring?

The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, special provisions enshrined in Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution for women and children and reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, respectively, all impose liabilities, grant concessions, and require additional amenities at the workplace but the government or courts did not let hiring factor come in the way of promulgation of this Acts. Interestingly, the discourse surrounding paternity leave in the private sector, currently available in the public sector through the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972, brings up the possibilities of societal stigma and professional penalties, but no one seems to think it would prevent men from being hired in the first place.

Furthermore, Bihar introduced a two-day menstrual leave policy as early as 1992. Other countries in Asia such as Indonesia, Taiwan, South Korea, and Vietnam have had period policies for several years with Japan paving the way in 1947. Europe has finally begun to catch up with Spain announcing a national policy in 2023. Individual companies such as Coexist in the UK and Nuvento in the US have taken the initiative to introduce paid period leaves. And so far, no data has been presented by any of these corporations or countries that would identify substantial economic loss on account of it.

In fact, the Australian company Modibodi has reported increased engagement and productivity after its implementation since the women felt valued and worked with increased efficiency after adequate rest and recuperation.

On the other hand, a 2019 study conducted by Radbound University discovered working through pain resulted in an average productivity loss of 9 days per person per year in companies. The issue is only exacerbated for non-binary, gender queer, and trans persons who are susceptible to violence and discrimination upon disclosing their menstrual status and might not work in places equipped with adequate provisions for their privacy and safety. While individual policies and state-level measures are steps in the right direction, India now needs a country-wide law for people who menstruate in the public, private, as well as unorganized sectors.

An attempt was made to present such a bill three times in the parliament- the Menstruation Bill, 2017, by Mr. Nirong Ering, the Women’s Sexual, Reproductive and Menstrual Rights Bill, 2018, by Dr. Shashi Tharoor, and recently, the Right of Women to Menstrual Leave and Free Access to Menstrual Health Products Bill, 2022, by Mr. Hibi Eden. Two years later, the Central Government has not taken any measures to enact or implement it in the present, nor indicated its desire to do so in the future. Whether the legislature formulates a national policy or not, its necessity and positive impact on working women can no longer be denied.

0 comments 32 views
4 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

By Lauren Prem

The long-standing debate regarding menstrual leave policy (hereinafter referred to as ‘the policy’) has erupted once again since the Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking menstrual leave, on 8th July 2024. A three-judge bench consisting of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra stated that the court cannot take up policy matters that fall clearly within the executive’s domain and in turn, directed the government to frame a policy for the same. A concern flagged by CJI DY Chandrachud while dismissing the petition revolves around gender representation as it is feared that recruiters will have lesser preferences for women due to the ‘paid leave’ factor.

While gender representation is largely viewed as a social issue, legal experts have contributed to this debate by voicing out their concerns regarding legislating on menstrual leave to ensure strict implementation.

Legal luminaries believe that biological differences must be taken into account in order to ensure inclusivity in the work place. In other words, women should not be held back from success due to something beyond their control. In addition to the argument concerning equality, it is widely acknowledged that health is an important part of performance and productivity and that the policy will ensure a healthier women workforce. As Supreme Court advocate Karuna Nundy shares ‘productivity is much better when people are feeling well.

The concern flagged by Justice DY Chandrachud lies at the heart of this ‘menstrual leave policy’ debate. The concern holds a presumption that a line of reasoning based on inclusivity would prove to be counterproductive as recruiters will be keen on selecting those who can offer higher productive hours. Further, studies show lesser female participation in workforce due to maternity leave and it is feared that the same would be the case with this policy also. Some lawyers also believe that the menstrual leave policy does not boil down to a ‘gender issue’ because every gender comes with its own set of ailments.

Arguments revolving around equality forms the very core of the menstrual leave policy debate. It is argued that women should not be discriminated based on their menstrual status. Arguments, along similar lines, ultimately narrow down to Aristotle’s notion of ‘treating equals equally and unequals unequally’ which has formed the crux of the equality code imbibed in article 14 of the constitution. Against the backdrop of this debate, unequals are being treated equally, as in, women who undergo menstrual pain are treated equally to men who do not undergo such pain. This, in turn, hinders women from achieving their full potential.

Another perspective of the menstrual leave policy laid out in the dismissed petition is that companies and workplaces in some states have already implemented the policy and it is discriminatory to women in those states that do not have such a policy, due to federalism. In other words, women within India are treated differently in different states. However, advocate Nundy considers this to be an incorrect interpretation of article 14. The reason might have been that policies are not justiciable per se and cannot be violative of fundamental rights. This pushed the debate further to a need for a legislation on this matter.

Advocate Abha Singh from the Bombay HC also interprets this policy in light of article 14. She demonstrates how the classification of leave made for women passes the test of reasonable classification under this particular article. This test has two requirements. Firstly, the classification made must be intelligible. Secondly, there must be a rational nexus between the classification and the object sought to be achieved by such classification. She expounds the objective of this policy to be one that ensures women do not compromise on their health and well-being, which hinders productivity. The classification made is intelligible and it bears a rational nexus with the object it seeks to achieve, that is, productivity through ensuring health.

Several constitutional principles point towards a maternity benefit policy to be put in place. For instance, article 39(a) of the Constitution states that the state must ensure the health and strength of workers, men, and women.’ While article 42 provides that the state must ‘make provisions for securing just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief.’ Article 47 states that the state has a duty to ‘raise standards of living and improve public health.’ In the absence of a policy, women may be forced to work with poor health conditions in order to avail their fully salary. This deteriorates their health further and contravenes the obligations of the state laid down in the directive principles of state policy.

Article 15(3) states that the state shall make provisions for the betterment of women and children. On top of this, women have a right to work under article 19(1)(g), which they cannot fully exercise without proper working conditions during menstruation. Supreme Court advocate Pallavi Pratap highlights that women do not have access to clean and hygienic alternatives at their workplace to cater to their menstrual needs.

The menstrual leave policy debate has opened discussions in legal, social and ethical spheres. While most arguments run along the lines of social transformation, gender representation and productivity, their roots can be located in legal jurisprudence and constitutional principles that strengthen women rights. Therefore, various interpretations of article 14 by different advocates and perceptions of the equality code form the heart and soul of this debate.

The equality code under article 14 of the Constitution should undoubtedly prevail over issues of productivity, that are wrongly located in work presence rather than efficiency and contribution, especially because the classification in this particular scenario clearly passes the test of intelligible differentia. Finally, directive principles of state policy, which are non-justiciable guidelines to be followed by the state, also advocate for the menstrual leave policy in addition to fundamental rights under part III of the Constitution.

The ball is now in the Government’s court and it remains to be seen whether the government comes up with a uniform policy on menstrual leave for women across India.

0 comments 41 views
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
The Womb - Encouraging, Empowering and Celebrating Women.

The Womb is an e-platform to bring together a community of people who are passionate about women rights and gender justice. It hopes to create space for women issues in the media which are oft neglected and mostly negative. For our boys and girls to grow up in a world where everyone has equal opportunity irrespective of gender, it is important to create this space for women issues and women stories, to offset the patriarchal tilt in our mainstream media and society.

@2025 – The Womb. All Rights Reserved. Designed and Developed by The Womb Team

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?