The Supreme Court ruling on paid menstrual leave has reignited discussions around gender equality. Evidence of the gender wage gap and gender stereotyping in occupations is well-documented in India. Reports indicate that on an average, females earn 20% less than their male counterparts, with the gap widening at higher-career levels. The court has noted that mandating paid menstrual leave could exacerbate the existing gender gap in the labour market. As more female workers take advantage of paid menstrual leave, employers might need to hire additional labour to cover their absences. This would increase wage costs, which could lead employers to recruit fewer women. Therefore, the provision of menstrual leave is viewed as falling outside judicial mandates and more within the domain of public policy and women’s welfare. Balancing the benefits of menstrual leave with potential economic implications requires a careful consideration of broader gender equality goals and labour market dynamics.
In India, another paid leave exclusive to women is maternity leave. The Maternity Benefit Act of 1961 was amended in 2017 to grant pregnant women 26 weeks of paid leave. However, recent evidence (Purna Banerjee and Debojyoti Mazumder from the RBI and Sreya Biswas from BITS) suggests that the MBA has been counterproductive for female employment, except for highly skilled workers. Researchers comparing employment outcomes before and after the reform have found that the provision of paid leave has led to a significant decline in female workforce participation.
The MBA allows for paid leave for two childbirths over a woman’s entire working life, totalling 52 weeks of wage benefits. In contrast, if menstrual leave is recognised, say, for two days every month, it would amount to the same wage burden as maternity leave in a little over two years and far exceed the cost over the entirety of a woman’s working life. Clearly, the employer’s response to maternity leave is likely to be repeated for menstrual leave, but with potentially greater impact.
In India, Bihar is the only state that has mandated two days of paid menstrual leave since 1992. Despite this policy, Bihar has the lowest female labour force participation rate in the country. According to the National Family Health Survey report, Bihar also records the lowest percentage (59.7%) of women using hygienic methods for menstrual protection. While causality is hard to determine, it’s reasonable to infer that the benefits of period leave, if any, have not translated into improved employment and menstrual health outcomes for Bihar.
The effectiveness of menstrual leave policies would depend on the nature of employment. In India, more than 50% of regular female workers in rural areas and 57% in urban areas are engaged in jobs without written contracts. Additionally, more than 40% of women in regular employment do not have access to paid leave, whether in rural or urban settings. This disparity suggests that female workers have limited bargaining power vis-à-vis their employers. Consequently, the potential impact of menstrual leave remains doubtful for a vast majority of women across urban and rural landscapes.
Proponents of menstrual paid leave argue that it should be a rights-based condition, necessitating flexible working conditions. One practical solution is to allow women to work from home during their menstrual cycles, thereby sharing the responsibility of menstrual care with household members. However, implementing this requires extensive community sensitisation, involving men in discussions about period problems and breaking the associated taboos.
Implementing such a cooperative solution demands significant behavioural changes and cultural reforms. While awareness campaigns can promote gender-sensitive behaviour, long-term success hinges on framing public policies and guidelines that enshrine menstrual rights. This policy backing is crucial for fostering a societal shift toward greater acceptance and support for menstrual health. Historical precedents, such as the Hindu Succession Act, demonstrate that gender-sensitive policies can effectively moderate entrenched social norms and bring about positive outcomes over time. The HSA, for example, played a pivotal role in enhancing female autonomy by ensuring their inheritance rights to parental property.
The Supreme Court has not dismissed the possibility of framing a menstrual leave policy. Instead, it has urged states to engage in discussions with relevant stakeholders to design a model policy. This call recognises that the effectiveness of menstrual leave policies depends on the interconnectedness of legal reforms, community engagement, and cultural change.
Female labour force participation varies across states, with above-average rates in the Northeast and regions near the Himalayan borders and with participation being lower in the Indo-Gangetic plains. For states with higher participation rates, emphasis should be placed on ensuring employer compliance with menstrual leave norms by incorporating period leave into wage contracts. In states with lower participation rates, the government should focus on promoting behavioural change and breaking social taboos alongside policy reforms.
Government policy towards menstrual leave is crucial to safeguard female interests in the Indian context. While Indonesia and Spain have successfully implemented such policies, it’s vital to acknowledge their distinct contexts compared to that of India. Indonesia and Spain demonstrate higher levels of female agency manifest in greater labour market participation and political representation compared to India. These factors might have contributed to a more conducive environment for mobilising social and political support for menstrual leave policies in those regions.
Incorporating menstrual leave into public policy in India is expected to face challenges. But once implemented, it holds the promise of significant advances for women’s welfare. Beyond potentially increasing female productivity, it could enhance the overall returns from employment and encourage greater female workforce participation. Achieving this will require a cooperative effort involving the State, political entities, communities, and significant labour market reforms.
Sukanya Sarkhel is Assistant Professor, Department of Management Studies, St. Xavier’s College (Autonomous), Calcutta. Prasenjit Sarkhel is Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Kalyani.
