An Indian start-up’s announcement that it would offer a day of paid menstrual leave for its female employees has triggered a debate. The company has gone on to run a campaign asking the government to make this a policy. Of course, this debate has come up in different countries at different times, most recently in Italy where that country’s Parliament was considering a proposal to give three days of paid menstrual leave a month to women who had painful periods. Most women, if not all, experience varying levels of pain and discomfort during menstruation.
In Italy, as in India, the argument against the proposal is that this would make companies think twice about hiring women. An allied argument is that this would validate the patriarchal misconception that women workers are inherently unreliable. Japan, for instance, has offered menstrual leave since 1947 but it is not paid and reports indicate that few women take advantage of it as they fear coworkers would think them weak.
The problem with these arguments is that they view the workplace as a static entity, forgetting that many of the benefits and rights that workers take for granted were once bitterly contested. The modern workplace is designed to benefit the able-bodied, heterosexual male worker. This is the norm that all workers—disabled, LGBTQ, female, etc—are expected to meet. Such an expectation is inherently unfair.
If paid menstrual or maternity leave or child care support is a reason for companies not to hire women, let us not forget that lack of such supports is also a barrier to women’s success in the workplace. These rights have yet to reach those in the unorganised sector, of which women make up a significant number. If we want a more equal society we need to acknowledge that while we are all equal, we have different needs that must be accommodated across class, caste and sector. Paid menstrual leave would be a step towards a more inclusive workplace and a more equal world.