Activists divided after SC declines plea on menstrual leave

Lawyers and activists have expressed varied views after the Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a plea seeking a nationwide menstrual leave policy, with some backing voluntary provisions while others stressing stronger legal safeguards to protect women’s health and dignity.

The apex court on Friday refused to entertain the PIL, observing that no one would give them jobs in such a scenario and that such a provision would unintentionally reinforce gender stereotypes.

Talking to mediapersons, senior advocate Karuna Nundy said a limited provision, such as one paid day of menstrual leave, could be a practical starting point. “The range of menstrual pain, from common cramps to endometriosis, is suffered by women regardless of whether they are studying or working. So the policies should address the woman’s health challenge and the variable context,” she said.

“One paid day of menstrual leave, to be taken as required, would be a good start. It’s like maternity leave, if you don’t have a baby, don’t take the leave, but

you shouldn’t have to pretend to be a pain-free hero when you have a cycle that literally allows the human race to perpetuate itself,” Nundy added.

Activist Yogita Bhayana criticised the concerns that menstrual leave could reduce women’s employment opportunities.

“This is very stupid of them to think like that. Women already deal with biological realities like pregnancy and childcare. If you deny them opportunities because of that, you should rather guide or dictate to corporates not to hamper jobs,” Bhayana told media.

Bhayana said many women face severe pain during menstruation and should be given the option to take leave. “There are women who suffer severe pain and cannot focus on work. Even if they report to the office, productivity is very low that day. A voluntary option for leave should definitely be given,” she said.

She also said such provisions should extend to students. “Students also go through the same pain. Sometimes, even sitting in class becomes difficult, and you cannot focus on your studies. So a voluntary option should be available for them as well,” she said.

Bhayana added that Governments should encourage voluntary policies even if courts have stepped back from the issue.

“Governments should take a stand and encourage voluntary policies. If the court has declined, State Governments should come forward and make it happen. Women are not asking for it for fun; it is a practical issue,” she said.

Bhayana said providing a voluntary option for leave would be a practical solution. “There are some women who don’t get pain, and they don’t need leave. Let it be voluntary. But denying everyone the option is wrong,” Bhayana said.

Ranjana Kumari, an activist, said the issue largely falls within the domain of State Governments.

“This comes in the area of the state. That may be the reason the Supreme Court is not willing to talk about industrial policy. Every state needs to legislate it or make an executive order so that women who are very unwell during menstruation can take leave. This is a very important aspect of women’s lives,” she said.

Kumari said menstrual leave should be available but not mandatory for every woman.

“I am for menstruation leave, but voluntarily. You cannot say that every woman must take three days’ leave every month. Many women may not need it. It should be available when a woman is facing pain or complications.”

She said workplaces should not deny such requests.

“There should be a clear norm that if a woman asks for leave because of menstrual pain, the institution should not be allowed to say no. If they refuse, there should be a penalty against them,” Kumari told PTI.

However, Kumari cautioned that policies must also consider the impact on women’s employment opportunities.

“We must protect the dignity and health of women while also ensuring they do not lose employment opportunities. Otherwise, institutions may say women work only a few days a month but are paid for the whole month,” she added.

Advocate Sunita Sharma supported the Supreme Court’s concerns, saying mandatory menstrual leave could unintentionally affect women’s employment prospects.

“I think that is right, because why should women show that we are weak as compared to men, that we can’t manage those three to four days?” she said.

Sunita said menstrual cycles are a personal matter and should not become a public workplace issue.

“In the Indian scenario, this is a very personal thing pertaining to your body. Why should the whole world know that you are having this time and you can’t come to the office because of that?” Sunita said.

Sunita said women generally learn to manage menstrual discomfort with time, and such leave could be misused.

“By the age everybody learns to cope with this. Of course, there are physical problems, but it is not so severe that you can’t come to the office. At times, the leave may also be misused if someone wants to go somewhere and says she cannot come to the office because of this,” she said.

According to her, if a woman faces health issues during menstruation, she should be able to take leave under existing provisions.

“If someone is not feeling well, she can take leave under sick leave, but there should not be a separate category called menstrual leave,” she said.

Seema Singh, a law professor at the University of Delhi, said the issue has several social and economic dimensions.

“This is a very sensitive issue, and there are several dimensions. It is not something which is related only to menstrual hygiene or the right to health of a menstruating woman, but there are several associated issues also,” Singh said.

She said mandatory provisions without broader societal acceptance could affect women’s employment prospects.

“Even if the Supreme Court makes it mandatory, in the private sector, employers may think their productivity will suffer, and they may avoid hiring women. So who is going to suffer then?” Singh said.

She said sensitisation of society was essential before implementing legal provisions.

“Everything cannot be implemented through law. Sensitisation is very important. Until we create sensitivity in people’s minds that during those days a woman may need rest, it will be difficult to implement such policies effectively,” she said.

The top court, however, said the competent authority may consider the representation and examine the possibility of framing a policy on menstrual leave after consulting all relevant stakeholders.