Menstrual leave policies have gained significant attention for promoting gender equality and employee welfare. Although many jurisdictions worldwide have adopted these policies, their legal standing is still under scrutiny. This article examines the constitutional perspective of menstrual leave policies, specifically focusing on the Supreme Court's stance on the matter. By understanding the legal framework surrounding menstrual leave, employers can navigate potential challenges and develop policies that meet both employee needs and legal requirements.

Introduction:
A policy that lets women take time off from work during their menstrual cycle is called menstrual leave. This strategy is significant as it perceives the remarkable difficulties and actual distress that females might insight during the menstrual cycle, which can hinder regular routines and make it challenging to partake in ordinary exercises By providing females with the help they need to deal with their feminine wellbeing unafraid of adverse results at work, menstrual leave can assist with advancing orientation balance.

Menstrual leave also recognizes and addresses the unique physical challenges and needs that women may face during their menstrual cycle, which helps de-stigmatize menstruation by allowing women to speak up about health issues related to their menstrual cycle and seek treatment or recovery time.

Menstrual leave policies, on the other hand, have been linked to gender stereotypes and the perpetuation of menstrual stigma, as well as an increase in discrimination and negative attitudes toward menstruators. Menstrual leave policies' implementation and impact are still up for debate. Some argue that they are important for gender equality, while others worry about unintended negative effects and potential violations of menstrual culture.

History of Menstrual Leave Policy:

The verifiable foundation of the menstrual leave policy uncovers a complex and developing scene. The idea of feminine leave strategies can be followed back to post-Progressive Russia in the mid-1900s when it was first executed in specific work areas. Be that as it may, this approach was subsequently taken out in 1927 because of the victimization of female specialists.

It is vital to take note that females confronted various limitations in the work environment during this time span. They were frequently disallowed from working night shifts or in occupations considered perilous or unfortunate for them, limitations that were not applied to men or during wartime circumstances.

Women were even required to retire after marriage in some nations. Instead of addressing menstrual health and gender equality in the workplace, the introduction of menstrual leave was viewed as a form of protectionist "motherhood" policy. Menstrual leave policies have their historical beginnings in addressing societal issues like finding jobs for returning soldiers and regaining the population in post-conflict nations.

For centuries, these policies have been discussed and debated, with varying levels of implementation and adoption in various nations. For instance, Japan established its feminine leave strategy in 1947 through the Work Norms Regulation, yet the take-up of this arrangement was declined throughout the long term.

It's important to note that employers sometimes use the fact that menstrual leave policies exist as an argument against giving female workers equal pay, making the story about these policies even more complicated. By and large, the verifiable foundation of feminine leave strategies features the diverse idea of this issue and the requirement for progressing conversations and endeavours to advance orientation equity and back females' well-being in the work environment.

Current status of feminine leave arrangements around the world:

The ongoing status of feminine leave arrangements overall fluctuates across various nations and associations. Employers in a variety of nations, including Japan, Taiwan, China, South Korea, Indonesia, Zambia, and Mexico, have adopted policies regarding menstrual leave. Menstrual leave has also been implemented by some businesses and professional organizations, such as Coexist in the United Kingdom, Culture Machine and Gozoop in India, and the Victorian Women's Trust in Australia.

In any case, there is restricted public information and admittance to HR approaches and methods in regard to the execution and utilization of menstrual leave strategies. In the US, the possibility of menstrual leave has gotten some momentum, with worries about reasonableness to the people who don't discharge or expected maltreatment of the approach being referred to as reasons against its execution. Additionally, a survey indicates that 24% of US workers do not have access to paid sick leave, and there are currently no federal requirements for paid sick leave.

China, South Korea, and Indonesia, on the other hand, have specific laws regarding menstrual leave. Menstrual leave is available in three provinces in China, women working in South Korea have been given one day off per month since 2001, and women in Indonesia have two days off per month. The current state of menstrual leave policies worldwide demonstrates that, despite the adoption of these policies by some businesses and nations, there is still ongoing debate regarding their expansion and the need for additional research to fully comprehend their effects on overall well-being and workplace status.

India's Stand on Menstrual Leave Policy:

The issue of the menstrual strategy in India has created huge conversation and discussion, especially corresponding to ladies' privileges and work environment uniformity. While menstrual leave arrangements are in many cases benevolent, there is the worry that they could have accidental unfortunate results for orientation value.

When discussing gender inclusivity, it is essential to take into account how gender intersects with age, class, and position in the organizational hierarchy. The discussion encompassing menstrual leave strategy has exposed significant issues with respect to the inclusivity of ladies' bodies in the work environment.

When compared to women working in the unorganized sector, women in the organized workforce generally have better access to safe and clean restrooms at home and at work. Presenting menstrual leave in associations can not just give females fundamental downtime during their period yet additionally advance solid conversations about the monthly cycle and sharpen the labour force and society at large.

It is critical to recognize that ladies frequently wonder whether or not to communicate distress connected with periods in the work environment because of disgrace, apprehension about separation, and botched proficient open doors. Even though there is no specific law in India that regulates menstrual leave, some industry players are developing internal protocols for employee wellness that include menstrual leaves.

This demonstrates the freedom that businesses have to offer more advantageous employment terms than what is required by law. In order to comprehend its implications for women's rights and workplace equality, it is essential to examine India's approach to the global implementation of menstrual leave policies.

Supreme Court's Stand on Menstrual Leave Policy:

While the Supreme Court may not have issued a direct and unanimous judgment on the constitutionality of menstrual leave policies.However, the assessment of such policies can be guided by constitutional principles, precedents, and jurisprudence on gender equality, discrimination, and workplace rights. This foundation provides valuable insights for interpreting and implementing these policies.

In 2022, The Supreme Court of India dismissed the PIL requesting menstrual leave for workers and students nationwide stating that menstrual leave is a policy issue which has different dimensions to it so should be left in the hands of the policymakers and it would also discourage employers from employing female workers.

Having said that it was also mentioned by the bench that menstruation is a biological process and women should not be discriminated against it in educational institutions and workplaces.

Conclusion:
Although the Supreme Court's stance on policies regarding menstrual leave may not be clear or consistent across jurisdictions, a number of constitutional principles provide guidance for evaluating them. Policies regarding menstrual leave can be justified if they aim to avoid discrimination and stereotypes while also promoting gender equality, employee well-being, and inclusion.

Organizations can implement menstrual leave policies that respect the rights of all employees and promote a fair and inclusive work environment by aligning policies with constitutional guarantees and legal standards. The constitutionally sound policy for menstrual leave strikes a balance between promoting an equitable and inclusive workplace and acknowledging the biological realities of menstruation.

As statute and cultural perspectives advance, it is crucial to stay informed concerning the furthest down the line legitimate improvements to guarantee that feminine leave approaches remain naturally powerful. But the most important thing is that, in addition to being necessary for advancing gender equality in the workplace, a successful policy regarding menstrual leave is also essential for fostering an inclusive environment in which individuals are valued and supported throughout their entire reproductive cycle.

Written By: Janhavi Bhatia

Also Read:

• Menstrual Leave In Islamic Jurisprudence: A Classical Rhetoric