The Karnataka government deserves credit for formally recognising menstrual health as a workplace issue and being the first Indian state to mandate paid leave across both public and formal private sectors, outpacing Bihar’s government-only model (Bihar, since 1992, has offered 2 days of paid menstrual leave per month to women government employees) and matching Odisha’s scope (in 2024, Odisha introduced a 1-day menstrual leave for women workers in government & private offices) potentially boosting women’s retention in labour-intensive sectors like Bengaluru’s garment factories, where 90% of workers are female.
It is a bold, gender-responsive step that moves the conversation from equality (blanket Rights based only) to equity (nuanced needs based as well). This is a policy that promotes dignity, destigmatises a natural biological function and acknowledges that forcing someone to work through debilitating pain is not ethical labour practice.
That said, good intent does not automatically translate into good policy.
Only cisgendered women will benefit
As it stands, the policy applies only to “cis-gendered women” within a fixed age bracket. This excludes many people who menstruate, including trans and non-binary persons and those outside narrowly defined age limits who still experience menstrual health challenges. A rights-based policy cannot afford to be biologically or socially reductive.
Exclusion of the informal sector
The policy is primarily anchored in formal labor statutes, effectively excluding the vast majority of working women in Karnataka who are in the unorganised sector: domestic workers, construction laborers, sanitation workers and street vendors and agricultural workers. These women, who often have the most physically demanding jobs and lack basic sanitation facilities, are the most vulnerable. For a daily wage worker, an ‘extra’ day of paid leave per month is meaningless if she is simply replaced the next day or if her employer is outside the regulated framework. This celebrates an “elite-class victory” while leaving the most marginalised behind.
Risk of workplace discrimination
A major and often-cited fear is that mandating an additional 12 days of paid leave per female employee annually, especially in smaller private companies (MSMEs), could lead to unconscious or deliberate bias in hiring and promotion. Employers may perceive women as more costly or less reliable, potentially favouring male candidates to minimise operational and financial burdens. Without a strictly enforced anti-discrimination framework, a policy designed to help women could ironically worsen their exclusion from the workforce.
Need for broader health and anti-stigma measures
Reducing women’s health needs solely to one day of menstrual leave per month is overly simplistic. The policy fails to adequately address the spectrum of reproductive health issues, such as endometriosis, severe UTIs or menopausal symptoms, that are not covered by this fixed benefit. Furthermore, in a deeply patriarchal society where the stigma of “impure” menstruating women persists, providing a specific menstrual leave category might inadvertently increase period shaming and pressure women not to take the leave to avoid public disclosure. Success requires not just a leave policy, but concurrent, sustained workplace sensitisation campaigns and investment in comprehensive women’s health services.
Starting a conversation is valuable, but real transformation requires structural, legal and inclusive follow-through rather than symbolic executive gestures, that leaves it to individual employers to implement the policy and not a State wide Right for all those who menstruate.