"No One Will Hire Women": SC Dismisses Menstrual Leave Plea – Global Policies Compared

New Delhi | March 24, 2026

 In a ruling that has sent shockwaves through India's corporate and feminist circles, the Supreme Court of India on March 13 dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a nationwide mandatory menstrual leave policy. The bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, refused to issue a writ, observing that such a legal mandate could backfire, leading to a significant decrease in hiring of women across the private and public sectors . Also Read report by BBC 

The court's observation has sparked a fierce national conversation, pitting the practical concerns of employability against the constitutional demand for gender equality in the workplace.

Is a Mandatory Menstrual Leave Policy Helping Women or Hurting Their Job Prospects?

The petition was filed by lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi, who sought a uniform policy granting "two-to-three days of leave" for menstrual pain, citing existing state-level policies in Bihar and Odisha, as well as progressive corporate policies at companies like Zomato and Swiggy .

However, the apex court expressed strong reservations about the unintended consequences of a compulsory law. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant voiced the bench's primary concern, stating that if the government mandates menstrual leave, employers would likely view female hires as a liability rather than an asset.

"If we make it compulsory, nobody will give them jobs," CJI Kant remarked from the bench. "Nobody will take them in the judiciary or government jobs; their career will be over. The thought behind the plea may be noble, but the result will be that it will lead to less hiring of women" .

Justice Joymalya Bagchi added to the concern, questioning the practical realities of the private sector: "Will an employer be happy with the competing claims of the other gender? There are two sides to the coin. You are trying to help, but the fallout might be that employers will not want to take women" .

Why Menstrual leave become such big controversy ?

The court's apprehension is not without statistical backing. A recent Naukri.com Hiring Outlook report released earlier this month highlighted that hiring bias against women remains a pervasive issue in the Indian workforce. According to the report, 42% of women cited bias in hiring and promotions as their biggest career hurdle. More alarmingly, one in two women admitted to hiding marriage or maternity plans during interviews for fear of discrimination.

Critics of the court's ruling argue that by citing hiring bias to reject a health policy, the judiciary inadvertently validated the very discrimination it sought to prevent. The Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) issued a statement calling the ruling "flawed and pro-employer," arguing that denying institutional support "invisibilises women's health concerns" and reinforces the stigma that menstruation makes women less capable than men .

Arguments for Menstrual Leave: Health and Dignity

Despite the court's dismissal, advocates for menstrual health awareness maintain that the policy is essential for true gender parity. They argue that the focus should not be on whether leave exists, but on normalizing the biological reality of menstruation to ensure safe working conditions for women.

Public health expert Sukriti Chauhan emphasized that the court's own precedents recognize menstrual health under Article 21 (Right to Life). "Denying support for painful menstruation is a violation of workplace dignity," Chauhan said. "If 50 to 90 percent of women experience dysmenorrhea (painful cramps), forcing them to choose between their health and their paycheck is not equality—it is systemic neglect" .

Interestingly, the ruling also found support from some unexpected quarters. Sister Mary Scaria, a Supreme Court lawyer, welcomed the dismissal but for different reasons. "Women are competing with men in every field today. Introducing such a compulsory menstrual policy will only project women as inferior to men," she said. "Voluntary policies are better as they allow women to choose without labeling them."

Existing Policies in India and Corporate Trends

India is not a stranger to menstrual leave. States like Bihar and Odisha already provide two days of menstrual leave per month for government employees, while Karnataka mandates one day per month for formal sector employees. Kerala has also introduced menstrual leave for students .

In the private sector, the trend is growing. According to the 2025 Best Companies for Women in India study by Avtar Group and Seramount, 38% of leading firms now offer formal menstrual leave, with an average of two paid days per month. Nearly 39% provide rest facilities or remote work options during periods, 41% offer mental wellbeing support, and 40% ensure access to sanitary napkin dispensers and medical consultations .

However, implementation comes with challenges. Corporate leaders, speaking anonymously, point to patterns such as leave clustering around weekends and inconsistent enforcement by line managers. HR veteran Prabir Jha cautions that "more categories mean more complexity, uneven enforcement and managerial subjectivity" .

Saundarya Rajesh, managing director at Avtar Group, argues that while misuse exists in any leave system, underuse driven by stigma is more prevalent. "Many employees hesitate to disclose menstrual health needs," she says, suggesting that silence may be a bigger organizational risk than excess .

Global Context: Menstrual Leave, Awareness, and Free Products Worldwide

To fully understand the debate, it is essential to examine how other nations have approached menstrual health in the workplace. From Japan's pioneering 1947 policy to Spain's recent landmark legislation, the global landscape offers valuable lessons on what works—and what doesn't.

Menstrual Awareness and Free Product Initiatives

Beyond workplace leave policies, a parallel global movement focuses on menstrual health awareness and free menstrual products. Period poverty—the lack of access to sanitary products, clean water, and hygiene facilities—affects an estimated 500 million women and girls worldwide .

Organizations like World Vision have launched campaigns such as "Post Your Pad" for International Women's Day 2026, encouraging supporters to craft reusable pads to raise awareness. The campaign highlights that in India, one-quarter of girls don't attend school during menstruation due to lack of sanitation, while in South Sudan, the figure rises to 57% .

Countries like Scotland (the first nation to make period products free by law in 2020), New Zealand (free products in schools since 2023), and several US states have implemented free menstrual product programs in schools and public institutions. These initiatives recognize that access to menstrual hygiene is not a luxury but a fundamental aspect of menstrual health awareness and gender equality.

Menstrual Leave Policies Around the World

Japan: The Pioneer with Low Utilization

Japan was the first country to introduce menstrual leave in 1947, known as seirikyuuka or "physiological leave." After World War II, inadequate toilets and a lack of sanitary products made it impossible for many women to work during menstruation .

Policy Details:

• No specified number of days

• Pay not guaranteed—employers decide if leave is paid or unpaid

• No medical certificate required

• As of 2020, only about 30% of companies offered full or partial salary during menstrual leave

Is it working? No. Fewer than 1% of women actually use it, and those who do often face discrimination or harassment. The policy's ambiguity and lack of pay protection have rendered it largely ineffective in practice .

South Korea: Unpaid Leave with Legal Protection

South Korea introduced menstrual leave in 2007, granting women one day of unpaid leave per month. Employers who fail to respect this right face high fines .

Policy Details:

• One day per month

• Unpaid

• Legally protected with penalties for non-compliance

Is it working? Partially. While the legal framework exists, many employers fail to implement regulations properly, refusing to provide leave or demanding intrusive proof from employees, which undermines dignity. Women who do not take the leave are eligible for additional wages, creating a financial incentive for employers to respect the policy .

Indonesia: Two Days with Implementation Gaps

Indonesia introduced menstrual leave in 2003, allowing up to two days of paid rest each month. The law requires employees to notify their employer in advance .

Policy Details:

• Two days per month

• Paid

• Advance notice required

Is it working? Inconsistently. Implementation in the private sector is inconsistent, with many organizations failing to follow the regulations. The specific arrangements (part-time leave, consecutive or discontinuous days) are left for discussion between parties, creating ambiguity .

Taiwan: Three Days Annually with Partial Pay

Taiwan's 2002 Gender Equity at Work Act established one day off per month, capped at a maximum of three days per year. These days are not deducted from sick leave but only if they remain within that limit .

Policy Details:

• Up to three days per year

• 50% of wage during leave (mirroring sick leave rules)

• Separate from 30 days of annual sick leave

Is it working? Mixed. Many employers fail to implement regulations properly, and the partial pay structure may discourage usage. However, the hybrid model (dedicated menstrual leave plus general sick leave) offers flexibility for chronic conditions .

Zambia: The "Mother's Day" Privacy Model

Zambia established menstrual leave in 2015, granting women one day off per month without needing to provide a medical certificate or prior notice. The policy is known as "Mother's Day," reflecting cultural emphasis on women's societal roles .

Policy Details:

• One day per month

• No medical certificate required

• No prior notice required

• Privacy-focused design

Is it working? Promising. The privacy-based approach protects women who feel uncomfortable mentioning periods in male-dominated workplaces. However, the cultural framing as "Mother's Day" has drawn criticism for reinforcing traditional gender roles .

Spain: Europe's First Paid Menstrual Leave Law

Spain's menstrual leave regulation came into force on June 1, 2023, following a narrow parliamentary vote of 185 in favor, 154 against, and 3 abstentions. The conservative People's Party (PP) warned that the law could lead to marginalization and negative labor market consequences for women .

Policy Details:

• Paid leave for "disabling menstrual conditions"

• Covers secondary dysmenorrhea, endometriosis, fibroids, PCOS, and related conditions

• Social Security covers subsidy from the first day (unlike general sick leave, which begins on day four)

• No prior Social Security contributions required

Is it working? Too early to tell, but utilization is low. The Spanish Ministry of Equality estimated that around 1% of women aged 16–50 (approximately 60,000 workers) might suffer from incapacitating menstrual symptoms. However, between June 2023 and February 2025, only 2,668 women used the allowance, with each leave lasting an average of three days .

This significant underutilization suggests that stigma remains a powerful barrier, even in a progressive European context. Women may hesitate to disclose menstrual health issues or fear workplace repercussions. There is still no evidence as to whether the policy has had any negative impact on women's employment in Spain .

Mexico: Physiological Leave Beyond Menstruation

In the State of Mexico, public employees receive leave for dysmenorrhea under a broader "physiological leave" framework. The policy identifies three beneficiary groups: women with severe dysmenorrhea, women dealing with menopause or climacteric symptoms, and men facing andropause-related discomfort .

Policy Details:

• Gender-neutral physiological leave

• Covers multiple life stages

• Public sector only

Is it working? Promising approach. By framing leave as physiological rather than strictly menstrual, Mexico reduces stigma and creates a more inclusive model that avoids singling out women .

What the Global Evidence Reveals

Common Challenges Across All Countries

1. Stigma and Underutilization: In Japan, fewer than 1% of women use available menstrual leave. In Spain, only 2,668 women used the policy in its first 20 months—far below projections. Across all countries, women hesitate to disclose menstrual needs for fear of being seen as weak or unreliable .

2. Implementation Gaps: Even where laws exist, employers often fail to comply, demand intrusive proof, or retaliate against women who use the leave .

3. Pay Structure Matters: Unpaid or partially paid leave (South Korea, Taiwan) sees lower utilization than fully paid models, though stigma remains a factor regardless.

What Works: Lessons for India

The Stigma Problem: A Universal Barrier

The most consistent finding across all global policies is that stigma remains the single greatest barrier to effective menstrual leave implementation. As The Conversation's analysis notes, "menstruation is often treated as something shameful or inconvenient. Period stigma makes it hard for women to express their needs at work, which means managing menstruation becomes a private struggle, unrecognized in the workplace" .

The debate over whether menstrual leave truly improves wellbeing or unintentionally reinforces discrimination remains open globally. As one scholar noted, the key question is whether such policies "unintentionally reinforce discrimination, negative stereotypes and resentment toward employees who make use of it" .

The Way Forward for India

While the Supreme Court dismissed the PIL, it did not ban menstrual leave. Instead, the bench directed the central government to consider framing a model menstrual leave policy in consultation with all stakeholders, including industry bodies and women's rights organizations .

"The court cannot frame a policy; it is for the government to look into this," CJI Kant noted, effectively shifting the debate from the judiciary to the executive.

Experts suggest India could adopt a hybrid approach drawing from global best practices:

• 1–2 paid leave days per cycle with confidentiality protections

• Work-from-home options for those who prefer flexibility

• No medical certificate requirement for standard leave

• Additional provisions for diagnosed chronic conditions (endometriosis, PCOS)

• Anti-stigma training for managers and HR

• Clear legal protections against discrimination in hiring and appraisals 

As Saundarya Rajesh of Avtar Group notes, "Framed correctly, such leave is not a concession but a talent and risk-management lever. Properly integrated, it can reduce burnout, lower unplanned absenteeism and strengthen employer brand" .

Conclusion

As India awaits the central government's next move, the global experience offers both caution and hope. Japan's century-old policy shows that legal provisions alone are insufficient without cultural change. Spain's recent experience reveals that even progressive European policies face underutilization due to stigma. Yet Zambia's privacy-focused model and Mexico's gender-neutral approach demonstrate that thoughtful design can mitigate these challenges.

The debate highlights a critical tension in the women's workforce participation narrative. While the Supreme Court's verdict was aimed at protecting women from being seen as "expensive" hires, activists argue it ignores the basic health rights that would allow women to participate equally in the economy.

For now, the responsibility lies with the Union government to draft a policy that balances the need for menstrual leave against the real-world risk of a decrease in hiring of women—a tightrope walk that will determine the future of workplace inclusivity in India. The global evidence suggests that with careful design, strong enforcement, and a commitment to ending stigma, menstrual leave can be a tool for empowerment rather than exclusion.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Who filed the menstrual leave petition in the Supreme Court?

A: The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi, seeking a uniform national policy granting two-to-three days of leave for menstrual pain. The petition cited existing state-level policies in Bihar, Karnata, Kerala and Odisha, as well as progressive corporate policies at companies like Zomato and Swiggy, as models for a nationwide mandate.

Q2: What did the Supreme Court say about mandatory menstrual leave?

A: The Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, expressed strong reservations about the unintended consequences of a compulsory law. The court refused to issue a writ mandating such a policy, warning that it could backfire and harm women's employment prospects rather than help them.

Q3: Why did the Supreme Court reject the menstrual leave PIL?

A: The court rejected the petition primarily due to concerns about hiring discrimination. The bench observed that if menstrual leave becomes mandatory by law, employers may view female employees as a liability, leading to a decrease in hiring of women across both private and public sectors.

Q4: What was CJI Surya Kant's main argument against mandatory menstrual leave?

A: Chief Justice Surya Kant stated that making menstrual leave compulsory would result in employers refusing to hire women. He remarked:

If we make it compulsory, nobody will give them jobs. Nobody will take them in the judiciary or government jobs; their career will be over. The thought behind the plea may be noble, but the result will be that it will lead to less hiring of women.

Q5: What did Justice Joymalya Bagchi say about the impact on private sector employers?

A: Justice Joymalya Bagchi highlighted the practical challenges in the private sector, questioning:

Will an employer be happy with the competing claims of the other gender? There are two sides to the coin. You are trying to help, but the fallout might be that employers will not want to take women.

He emphasized that while the intention behind the petition was noble, the potential consequences could be detrimental to women's workforce participation.

Q6: Did the Supreme Court completely dismiss the idea of menstrual leave?

A: No. The court did not ban menstrual leave. It dismissed the PIL seeking a mandatory nationwide policy but directed the central government to consider framing a model menstrual leave policy in consultation with all stakeholders, including industry bodies and women's rights organizations. The court clarified that policy-making is the domain of the executive, not the judiciary.

Q7: What existing menstrual leave policies did the petition cite?

A: The petition cited:

• Bihar and Odisha: Two days of menstrual leave per month for government employees

• Karnataka: One day per month for formal sector employees

• Private companies: Zomato (up to 10 days/year), Swiggy, and other corporate policies

Q8: What was the central concern behind the court's decision?

A: The central concern was that a mandatory menstrual leave policy would:

• Make women "expensive" or "complicated" employees in the eyes of employers

• Lead to discrimination in hiring against women

• Reinforce stereotypes that menstruation makes women less capable or reliable than men

• Ultimately harm women's career prospects rather than protect their health rights

Q9: Is there a risk that mandatory menstrual leave could backfire?

A: According to the Supreme Court, yes. The bench warned that while the intention was to support women, the practical fallout could be that:

• Employers may avoid hiring women altogether

• Women may face stigma in the workplace

• Women's representation in jobs, judiciary, and government positions could decline

• The policy could unintentionally reinforce the stereotype that women are "inferior" or "less productive"

Q10: What happens next after the Supreme Court's ruling?

A: The Supreme Court has directed the central government to take up the matter. The government is now expected to:

• Consult with stakeholders (industry bodies, women's rights organizations, trade unions)

• Consider framing a model menstrual leave policy

• Decide whether such a policy should be voluntary, mandatory, or left to individual states and companies

Until then, existing state-level policies (Bihar, Odisha, Karnataka) and corporate policies remain in place.

Q11: If seats are already reserved for women in Govt Sector, why would menstrual leave affect hiring?

A: Reservation only gets you through the door. Once hired, an employer (even the government) looks at "cost and consistency." If a policy makes women appear "more expensive" or "less available" due to monthly leaves, departments might become hesitant to hire women beyond the minimum required quota, or they may view female candidates as a liability during the selection process for non-reserved seats.

Q 12: How many countries currently have national menstrual leave laws, and what are their rules?

Globally, around seven countries have national menstrual leave laws.

The most prominent are Spain (the first in Europe), Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Zambia, Vietnam, and Taiwan. While some offer paid days off, others only guarantee unpaid leave or shorter breaks during the workday.