INTRODUCTION
Menstruation is a natural biological process. However, it is often surrounded by stigma and silence, particularly in patriarchal societies like India. As discussions around gender-sensitive workplaces and menstrual equity increase, the push for a legal framework for menstrual leave has gained traction. While some state and private organizations have made significant strides, India still lacks a unified national policy or law for menstrual leave. This absence raises an important question: Is menstrual leave a right that empowers women, or does it risk reinforcing gender bias and workplace discrimination?
This blog looks at the Indian legal and policy context regarding menstrual leave, compares it to global examples, and assesses whether implementing such policies would promote or obstruct gender equality in India.
THE LEGAL STATUS QUO IN INDIA
India does not have a national law that mandates menstrual leave for students or workers. However, there have been isolated efforts over the years:
- Bihar has provided two days of special leave per month for female government employees since 1992 for “biological reasons.”
- In the private sector, Zomato launched a menstrual leave policy in 2020[1], offering up to 10 days of paid leave annually for menstruating employees.
- The Menstruation Benefit Bill, 2017 was introduced by MP Ninong Ering in Parliament. This bill aimed to give women in both the public and private sectors two days of paid menstrual leave each month. It also required workplaces to provide mandatory breaks and rest facilities. However, the has not been reintroduced since it had lapsed.
Currently, menstrual leave is at the discretion of employers or governed by state-specific rules, not established legal rights.
GLOBAL CONDITION: A MIXED BAG OF PROGRESS
Many countries around the world have tried different forms of menstrual leave laws:
- Japan introduced menstrual leave in 1947, allowing women to take time off if working during menstruation is difficult.[2]
- South Korea offers one day of menstrual leave each month.
- Paid menstrual leave is given in Indonesia for two days each month.
- Taiwan offers three days per year at half pay[3].
- A “Mother’s Day” off is given in Zambia for each month, no matter the parental status[4]Despite these laws, studies reveal low take-up of menstrual leave due to workplace stigma and fear of being seen as weak or less productive.
THE CASE OF MENTAL LEAVE
- Recognizing Biological Needs:
Menstrual cycles can cause intense physical discomfort, including painful cramps, nausea, fatigue, and migraines. In severe cases, conditions like endometriosis[5] And PCOS can make daily activities unbearable. Expecting equal performance regardless of physical condition ignores medical realities.
- Promoting Gender-Sensitive Workplaces:
Menstrual leave policies communicate that workplaces are inclusive and understanding. They can help destigmatize menstruation and represent a shift toward more equitable labor policies.
- Improved Productivity and Well-Being:
Presenteeism—being present at work but not performing well due to discomfort—is common among menstruating employees. Allowing them to rest on difficult days can actually improve long-term productivity and morale.
- Level Playing Field for Economically Vulnerable Women:
Women in informal labor—like street vendors, domestic workers, and sanitation workers—often lack access to hygiene facilities or rest. A legal right to menstrual leave could push public employers and contractors to meet minimum welfare standards.
THE COUNTERARGUMENTS: A SLIPPERY SLOPE?
- Risk of Reinforcing Stereotypes:
Critics are concerned that menstrual leave might support the stereotype that women are “weaker” or “less capable.” This could bring them to the edges in workplaces dominated by men.
- Hiring Discrimination:
Employers may view menstrual leave as an additional cost or a logistical hassle, leading them to prefer male candidates or women less likely to take leave.[6].
- Stigma and Low Uptake:
Even in places like Japan and South Korea, many women avoid using menstrual leave due to fear of judgment, ridicule, or lack of privacy. Without widespread cultural change, the law might fail to have its intended effect.
- Exclusion of Non-Binary and Trans Individuals:
Most discussions about menstrual leave focus on cisgender women. There are other people also who menstruate, such as trans men and non-binary individuals, but they often feel left out of workplace provisions. A law that only addresses “women” may overlook others who menstruate[7].
LEGAL AND POLICY SUGGESTIONS FOR INDIA
India’s legislative environment offers potential avenues to implement menstrual leave while minimizing risks:
- Amend Existing Labor Laws:
Menstrual leave could be integrated into the Code on Social Security, 2020, or the Factories Act to ensure equitable treatment for employees across formal sectors.
- Optional Leave with Safeguards:
Instead of mandatory leave, an optional, self-certified leave (similar to sick leave) can provide flexibility while addressing concerns about misuse. This approach respects personal choice and prevents tokenism.
- Anti-Discrimination Provisions:
Any menstrual leave law must include strong protections against retaliation, discrimination, or penalization for using the benefit.
- Awareness and Sensitization:
Legal reforms should be paired with corporate training, public messaging, and
education about menstrual health to dispel stigma and normalize menstruation as a health issue, not a taboo[8].
- Inclusivity in Language and Scope:
The law should explicitly include trans men, intersex, and non-binary people who menstruate by using gender-neutral terms like “menstruating persons” instead of just “women.”
REFRAMING THE PATH AHEAD
Though the movement for menstrual leave is commendable, it’s important to consider the context. Simply copying policies from other countries could lead to problems
unless India addresses its unique workplace gender dynamics, cultural taboos, and the dominance of the informal sector.
Instead of framing menstrual leave as a choice between “progressive and regressive,” we should focus on empowering individuals based on their choices. The aim is not to isolate or excuse menstruating people from work, but to support them without undermining equality.
Implementing a pilot program in government offices, public schools, and public sector undertakings could provide valuable insights. Feedback from these initiatives can help shape policies for broader application.
CONCLUSION
The discussion about menstrual leave mirrors a larger conversation about how we view gender, health, and work. A thoughtful menstrual leave policy in India could support bodily autonomy, dignity at work, and inclusive governance. However, without precise legal language and a shift in culture, it might reinforce the biases it seeks to eliminate.
What India needs is not just another law but a legal change based on empathy, science, and intersectionality.
Author(s) Name: Gauri Dixit (Atal Bihari Vajpayee School of Legal Studies, CSJMU, Kanpur)
References:
[1]PR Team’s ‘Introducing period leaves for women’ (Zomato Blog), 08 August 2020 <https://blog.zomato.com/period-leaves> accessed 26 June 2025
[2]Japanese Labour Standards Act 1947,art 68
[3]Taiwan Act of Gender Equality in Employment 2002, art 14
[4]National Assembly of Zambia, Employment Code Act 2019
[5]Bhaskar Upadhyay ‘ Is Mentrual Leave An INdirect Discrimination? ’ (Legally Flawless, 16 May,2023) <https://legallyflawless.in/is-menstrual-leave-indirect-discrimination/> accessed on 26 June, 2025
[6]Aastha Bansal ‘An Analysis Of The Pros And Cons Of The Menstrual Leave Policy ’ (SPRF India, 03 February, 2025) <https://sprf.in/an-analysis-of-the-pros-and-cons-of-the-menstrual-leave-policy/> accessed on 26 June, 2025.
[7]Ali Gordon ‘Period taboo: Why can’t we talk about menstruation?’ (BBC, 24 February, 2019) <https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-47254222> accessed on 27 June, 2025