CITU slams Supreme Court over women's menstrual leave career prospects remark, calls it 'misleading textbook response'

CPI(M)-backed CITU on Saturday described Supreme Court's observations on menstrual leave that it may impact women's job opportunities as a "fallacious and misleading textbook response" that portray all labour rights as obstacles to 'ease of doing business'.

It also claimed it was the "same anti- worker, anti-women approach" that made the Supreme Court not entertain a petition seeking minimum wages applicable to domestic workers while making comments against trade unions.

Chief Justice of India Suryakant Mishra and Justice Joymala Bagchi expressed apprehensions about future job opportunities for women if menstruation policy is mandated even as it encouraged voluntary initiatives.

Expressing "serious concern and strong disagreement" with the court's observations, CITU General Secretary Elamaram Kareem said a menstrual leave policy will have a significant implication for all working women in India, where menstrual health is often stigmatised and not given priority.

"Menstrual leave is not a concession but a necessary measure for substantive equality and humane working conditions. Women workers do not need paternalistic arguments about how their rights may harm their careers. What they need are stronger labour protections, enforcement of equality, and recognition of their health and dignity at work," he said.

Citing studies that suggested that 50-90% of females experience painful menstrual cramps, and chronic conditions like endometriosis, adenomyosis, and polycystic ovary syndrome are associated with severe pain, heavy bleeding and fatigue, he said denying the need for institutional support in workplaces only invisibilises women’s health concerns.

"It is all the more important to have a national menstrual leave policy to help our working womenfolk to rest properly and seek necessary medical help for menstrual health issues without fear of workplace repercussions," he said.

Recalling Supreme Court recent recognition of menstrual health and hygiene as part of the Right to Life and Dignity under Article 21, Kareem found fault with the court's reasoning calling it "deeply flawed and pro-employer", which shifts the burden of discrimination onto women workers instead of confronting the structural discrimination that exists in the labour market.

"The argument that women’s rights at the workplace should be curtailed because employers may discriminate against them is unacceptable. By that logic, many progressive labour protections for women - including maternity benefits, workplace safety norms, and equal opportunity measures - would never have been enacted," he said.

He said it is a fact that the women employees are discriminated against in recruitment and promotion for availing maternity leave among others.

Instead of diluting or opposing protective measures, he said, the government and judiciary must ensure strict enforcement of anti-discrimination norms and create conditions where employers cannot penalise women for biological and health-related needs.

Kareem also highlighted that Karnataka has already mandated one day off per month for menstrual leave without medical certification for employees while Kerala has similar leave for students.

Government employees in some states like Bihar and Odisha also get menstrual leave, he said while countries like Japan, Indonesia, Zambia, Italy, Spain, Ireland and some provinces in China and South Korea have already implemented such policies, he added.