Feminist Perspective on Leaves: Period leave & Safe leave

Abstract

Introduction

Period leave

Safe leave

Context

History / Feminist Movements (Period Leave) 

Period Leave

Safe leave

Current State provision

Safe leave

Period leave

Paid Leaves: A Perfect Plan or Plagued in Practice?

Benefits

Potential Pitfalls

Overview

Recommendations

Menstrual leave

Safe leave

Conclusions

Bibliography / Sources / Citations / References

Abstract

The necessity of policies such as period leave and safe leave has recently regained prominence in the feminist debate. The disadvantages related to issues such as menstrual pain and gender-based violence (GBV) affect women not only in their private life, but in the workplace too. This risks resulting in an added factor of discrimination for working women, especially for those whose job is statistically already less secure, such as migrant women.

This paper attempts to build a comprehensive outlook on the implementation of period leave and safe leave, evaluating the surrounding debate  and assessing the level of protection offered by current provisions. Starting from an historical perspective, the role of the feminist movement emerges clearly; both measures were the product of grassroots activism advocating for broader protection in the workplace. Still, the introduction of such policies continues to inflame the debate within the feminist movement, with some denouncing the measures as having a negative effect on gender-based discrimination in the workplace.

Moving to the analysis of current state provisions, what stands out is the limited number of countries that have implemented forms of paid leave or safe leave. This essay proposes using Spain, the first EU country to adopt period leave, as one case study. In regard to safe leave, there is a higher number of examples both across Europe and the whole world. The implementation for both types of leave has sparked heated debates, with some opposing them entirely and others reporting the need for even further and higher levels of protection. 

It is indeed not an easy task to objectively evaluate the efficacy of these provisions. Both help in the development of a more inclusive workplace, for instance by reducing the taboo surrounding menstruation or domestic violence/SA and granting women economic stability while they are dealing with difficult situations. At the same time, they could inadvertently reinforce gender stereotypes about presumed inherent female vulnerability. In addition, the need for a bureaucracy-validated proof increases the costs of accessing the leave, and risks deepening class based divisions amongst women. A cultural shift is needed in order to increase the efficacy of period and safe leave. Therefore, the role of education is fundamental. What seems to be missing is an intersectional approach that could shed light on the practical ways in which the measures can be more inclusive. Reducing bureaucracy is a first step, and it should be accompanied both by integrative measures (i.e. psychological and medical) and by strengthening of the economic support provided.

Introduction

The gradual advancement of women’s rights has resulted in a shift regarding the conversation on paid and safe leave. The rationale of such leave seems quite straightforward: no individual should be penalised or forced to work when dealing with issues they cannot control, especially when some of them are even biologically inescapable. Whilst the logic of this argument is hardly debatable, the actual implementation of these policies is far from simple due to social, cultural, and economic barriers.

Period leave

Paid period leave promotes gender equality and addresses the health needs of those who menstruate. Research shows that about 35% experience moderate to severe symptoms affecting work and daily life (Dennerstein et al., 2010). While cisgender women are the primary beneficiaries, menstruation also affects trans men and non-binary individuals, making period leave an intersectional issue (Rydström, 2020). Workplace policies must consider these diverse experiences to ensure inclusivity and support for all who menstruate.

On a more general note, pressure regarding the implementation of period leave is highlighted by many recent studies on painful menstruation. Medical research has been analysing the effects of dysmenorrhea (painful periods) on women’s wellbeing, highlighting how it can in a concerning percentage of cases affect women in their daily life. A study published in 2024 on the quality of life of women with dysmenorrhea reports that almost 95% women suffer from moderate to high levels of pain (Amza et al., 2024). This emerges as even more impressive when considering the effect on daily lives that the women of the study report; among those who suffer from high levels of pain, almost 90% report some impact on their daily life (ibid.). It emerges clearly how menstruation-related pain can put women (or any person who menstruates) in a difficult position: in order to keep their job or avoid discrimination related to something they cannot control, some individuals have to endure pain, and suppress it to continue to work or be put into a vulnerable situation .

Figure 1 (Amza et al., 2024)

Period leave can, in the first place, help women avoid physical and mental strain. At the same time they potentially have a major role in reducing the stigma around menstruation. Nonetheless, as of 2025, only a few countries (see figure 2) have implemented any form of period leave (Days for Girls, 2023). The latest country to adopt similar measures being Spain, this topic has sparked debates among the EU, but no other European country has yet adopted any similar policy (Kassam, 2024).

Figure 2 (Days for Girls, 2023)

Safe leave

Safe leave shows some signs of progression in Europe. Safe leave is a form of paid leave for victims of domestic violence, intimate partner violence (IPV) or sexual abuse (WAVnet, 2024). As in the case of period leave, more widespread awareness of gender-based violence (GBV) has been favorable to the development of a shared sensibility on the topic and has led policy makers to face the need for broader protection of victims. GBV is currently one of the major concerns of feminist organisations as the data paints an extremely bleak picture. Data provided by the World Bank shows that around 20-35% of women, depending on the region, have had experiences with IPV during their life (World Bank, n.d.). Furthermore, in some regions around 20% of women report that they have experienced physical or sexual abuse during the course of the previous year (World Bank, n.d.). This is even more concerning when considering that many women choose not to report their abuser in fear of retaliation, or, they are not believed by law enforcement even when they choose to do it (Birdsey & Snowball, 2013). The incidence of such troubling phenomena shows the pressing need to introduce measures such as the safe leave; without any form of protection, women may tend to shrug off their traumatising experiences of abuse in order not to lose their job.

Figure 3 (World Bank – Gender Data Portal, n.d.)

Figure 4 (World Bank – Gender Data Portal, n.d.)

Contrary to period leave, the diffusion of safe leave or similar policies is more widespread in the world. Anglophone countries lead the way, along with many EU countries and other often forgotten cases, such as the Philippines and Argentina (Vijeyarasa, 2024). However, it is fundamental to recognise that in many cases the implementation of a safe leave is not mandatory within the entirety of a country. In the case of the USA, for instance, only a few states have decided to adopt such regulation, while the lack of a federal law leaves victims of abuse unprotected (Center for American Progress, 2024).

This paper will analyse the history behind period leave and safe leave, highlighting the debate around these measures and evaluating it with an intersectional feminist approach. In addition, it will provide a comparative analysis of the current state provisions that have been implemented across different countries. Finally, it will provide some policy recommendations, aiming to broaden the spectrum of people protected by these measures and to facilitate their use.

History / Feminist Movements (Period Leave) 

Period Leave

The implementation of period leave has sparked significant debate within Europe’s feminist movements, with critiques concerning its potential to reinforce stereotypes about women’s productivity and reinforce gendered expectations in the workplace. Historically, feminist arguments in favor of period leave have centered on the need for bodily autonomy and the right to work without facing discrimination or discomfort due to menstruation. Advocates argue that period leave is a necessary component of gender equality, as it acknowledges the biological realities that impact women’s health and productivity. Furthermore, it provides an opportunity for women to address their health needs without fear of workplace repercussions, which could include stigma or discrimination. 

Feminist critiques of the policy have highlighted its potential to reinforce outdated stereotypes about women’s fragility. Some argue that introducing period leave might inadvertently suggest that women are less capable of performing at the same level as men, further entrenching gendered notions of weakness and emotionality. Others worry that paid period leave could lead to a “separate but unequal” status for women in the workforce, with men receiving no such accommodations. These criticisms suggest that period leave, while well-intentioned, might not be the best long-term solution for achieving gender equality in the workplace (Levitt, Barnack-Tavlaris, 2020). 

As the debate surrounding period leave continues, the feminist movement has remained divided on the issue. However, what has become clear is that the policy is deeply connected to larger discussions around reproductive justice, gender equality, and the social recognition of women’s health issues. Researchers and advocates have pushed for a more nuanced understanding, as reproductive rights must address stigmas surrounding periods, as societal taboos often frame it as shameful or unclean (Johnston-Robledo & Chrisler, 2013), leading individuals to conceal their needs and avoid discussions about their symptoms. Without normalisation within workplace culture, menstrual leave risks exacerbating stigma rather than reducing it. Additionally, barriers such as privacy concerns, discomfort in requesting leave, and the potential for biased evaluations of employees who utilise it (Forbes et al., 2003) can pose significant challenges. Ensuring accessibility is also critical, as socio-economic factors, minority status, and organisational culture may hinder equitable access to menstrual leave.

The first country to implement paid period leave was Soviet Russia in 1921, aiming to improve women’s working conditions and reduce unemployment. While seen as a step toward emancipation, it faced backlash as women were laid off for taking leave, leading to its eventual revocation (Ilic, 1994). Asia has the highest number of countries with period leave policies. Japan introduced it in 1947 under U.S. influence post-WWII (Levitt & Barnack-Tavlaris, 2020). Indonesia (1948) followed, focusing on industrial and mining workers due to poor working conditions. Vietnam, South Korea, and Taiwan also introduced regulations, while India, the Philippines, and China have limited measures. A 2011 nationwide proposal in China failed, but over ten provinces, including Shanghai and Hainan, have legalised some form of menstrual leave (Huet, 2022).

Safe leave

Feminist organisations and labour unions have historically played a crucial role in advancing workplace protections, including the recognition of GBV as a labour rights issue. Gendered violence ranging from domestic violence to sexual harassment and assault has a direct impact on employment stability, absenteeism, workplace productivity, and economic security, making it a key concern for labour movements. Unlike many governments or private sector actors that have been slow to acknowledge these connections, unions have leveraged collective bargaining and workplace negotiations to secure protections for survivors.  

Australia’s feminist labour unions began integrating domestic violence protections into collective bargaining in the 1980s, driven by grassroots activism in female-dominated sectors like healthcare, education, and social services (McFerran, 2011). Similar movements in Canada and New Zealand saw unions push for employer accountability in cases of intimate partner violence (Johnson & Gardner, 1999). Through lobbying, legal challenges, and partnerships with feminist groups, unions helped secure national labour laws, with safe leave provisions often emerging in unionised sectors first.

In South Africa, trade unions integrated GBV protections into workplace policies post-apartheid, as labour and gender equality movements merged. COSATU championed domestic violence leave and workplace protections, framing them as essential labour rights (Benjamin, 2024). In Latin America, feminist labour organisations in Argentina and Brazil secured legal protections for workers facing domestic violence. Argentina’s Ni Una Menos movement (2015) spotlighted GBV’s impact on employment, leading to Law 26.485, which mandates workplace protections (Kinzerska-Martinez, 2020). However, President Javier Milei’s administration has threatened these gains, pushing to roll back labour protections including domestic violence leave under deregulatory policies. Unions and feminist groups continue to resist, though enforcement of policies has weakened (Gargarella, 2024).

The shift from grassroots activism to formal policy advocacy in the 1990s and early 2000s marked a turning point in labour movements’ engagement with GBV protections. Initially, feminist and labour activists focused on local-level initiatives, such as union-negotiated protections and workplace education programs. However, as evidence of the economic and social costs of gendered violence accumulated, advocacy efforts began to target national and international policymaking institutions.  

By the 2010s, international organisations began to recognise GBV as a labour rights issue, formalising workplace protections at a global level. The United Nations, particularly through UN Women, played a critical role in shaping international discourse on GBV-related labour rights. In 2018, UN Women published a report on gender-responsive labour policies that explicitly recommended the integration of safe leave into national labour laws (UN Women, 2018). This report was crucial because it provided governments with a policy blueprint that offered empirical evidence of the benefits of paid leave for survivors and its cost-effectiveness in preventing long-term economic losses due to GBV-related absenteeism. Following this, several countries revised labour codes to include safe leave provisions, citing UN Women’s recommendations.  

The ILO’s Convention 190 (International Labour Organisation 2019) was the first legally binding treaty addressing workplace GBV, recognising domestic violence as a labour issue (Blackett, 2020). It mandated paid leave, flexible work, and job security for survivors while requiring national laws on employer responsibility. Its ratification has driven global adoption of safe leave provisions, aligning labour policies with ILO standards.

In Europe, the movement for safe leave has been driven by a coalition of feminist organisations, labour unions, and migrant rights groups (WAVE, 2022). These groups have emphasised that women in precarious employment, especially migrant women, are at the highest risk of losing their jobs due to GBV-related absences. The European Trade Union Confederation  has also lobbied for the inclusion of safe leave in EU labour directives, arguing that the economic cost of GBV and the employer’s duty to protect workers justify paid leave provisions (ETUC, 2021). 

Despite growing support, resistance from business lobbies and conservative political groups has slowed legislative progress. Opponents argue that mandatory paid leave could impose financial burdens on employers, particularly small businesses (European Business Confederation, 2023). However, feminist organisations counter that the economic cost of failing to protect survivors is far greater, as lost productivity and high turnover rates due to GBV ultimately affect national economies (Quédraogo, R, Stenzel, D 2021.) 

Current State provisions

Period leave

In Europe, a proposal for menstrual leave was introduced in the Italian Parliament in 2017, sparking intense debates as it was the first European country to address the issue within its legislative body. However, the proposal was not enacted into law (European Institute of Women’s Health, 2018). Some European countries have more indirect provisions, with period leave included under the broader category of “sick leave” when supported by a doctor’s note. For instance, countries like Germany and Finland include it in this category, but the leave is not specifically designated for menstruation. It is crucial to note that framing period leave as part of general sick leave is important for dismantling stigma around menstruation. Unlike illness, menstruation is a natural biological process that can cause debilitating symptoms, yet it remains marginalised in workplace policies. Distinct period leave acknowledges these unique challenges, preventing people who get periods from disproportionately using up their sick leave and facing potential professional disadvantages, like “broken ladder” (referring to systemic barriers in the workplace for marginalized groups such as wage gaps, discrimination, and biases) or “double burden” (referring to the additional burden on women as they manage both paid work outside the home, and unpaid domestic work).

Spain stands as the first European country to officially implement a paid period leave policy. The decision to introduce this measure sparked significant debates across society, and even in the government’s own party (Camut, 2023). While some viewed it as a major step forward in women’s rights, others expressed concerns that it could reinforce negative stereotypes about their capabilities in the workplace. The bill was part of a broader law, which aimed to facilitate access to abortion in public hospitals and included the free provision of menstrual products in schools and prisons. 

The proposal of paid period leave was not a new demand in Spain. It had been part of the civil society’s debate for decades, though its formalisation into policy had been delayed. Feminist groups had long campaigned for reproductive health rights, including the recognition of menstruation as a valid reason for absence from work. A crucial aspect of paid period leave is the requirement in some countries to provide a doctor’s note to validate the leave. In systems without universal or free healthcare, the need for a doctor’s note becomes an added financial burden on individuals who already face the challenge of managing menstruation while working. For low-income workers, this could mean taking time off not only for health reasons but also to cover the cost of seeing a doctor. This situation effectively undermines the intention behind paid period leave, as it adds an additional layer of difficulty for women who are already economically disadvantaged. A system that requires them to pay to prove the necessity of the leave, in order to access period leave, fails to fully address the needs of the workers it aims to protect, especially in a gendered context where women’s reproductive health concerns are often marginalised.

Safe leave

In most cases, EU Member States do not present prominent leave provisions for domestic violence. Countries like Germany, Austria and Sweden protect victims of domestic violence under general labour laws providing access to financial assistance for survivors, specialised shelters, legal and medical support (Human Rights Watch, 2021). In the private sector, it is up to employers to offer paid leave. For instance, in France there are agreements on professional equality including paid domestic violence leave ranging from three to five days (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2023). Others – like Spain – follow the “flexible line” by offering victims of gender-based violence the possibility to reorganise their working time or to suspend their employment contract, to take care of themselves (Human Rights Watch, 2021).

However, some countries stand out from the crowd. Ireland represents one of the first virtuous examples in the EU to implement paid leave for domestic violence. The Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 establishes that employees experiencing or at risk of domestic violence are entitled to up to five days of paid leave within a 12-month period. This leave is paid at the full rate and can be taken without prior notice, allowing individuals to access support services, medical and legal assistance (Government of Ireland, 27 November 2023).

Ireland is not alone. Italy, in fact, has implemented specific measures to support victims of domestic violence, including provisions for leave. According to Article 24 of Legislative Decree No. 80/2015, survivors of gender-based violence are entitled to a paid leave of up to three months (Article 24 of Legislative Decree No. 80/2015). Such leave is based on survivors’ right to protection, recognising their need for additional time to relocate or receive psychological support. Despite its significant length, the safe leave in the Italian legislation addresses only women experiencing gender-based violence and is included in an official anti-violence protection programme (INPS, 2019).  In contrast, Ireland’s law is more inclusive: in fact, anyone, regardless of their gender, experiencing domestic violence can have access to safe leave. Furthermore, the safe leave may be taken by employees also when a “relevant person” to them has suffered or is suffering from domestic violence (Workplace Relations Commission, 2023).

Spain has one of the most advanced frameworks for addressing GBV in the workplace. Under Organic Law 1/2004 on Comprehensive Protection Measures Against Gender Violence, survivors of intimate partner violence are entitled to paid leave for medical, legal, and psychological assistance, flexible working hours and job relocation options and protection from dismissal due to GBV-related absences. In recent years, Spanish labour unions have pushed for expanding these protections to cover all forms of workplace sexual violence (namely sexual harassment and gender-based harassment), arguing that current laws focus too narrowly on domestic violence (CCOO, 2023). This advocacy reflects broader European trends, where labour unions and feminist movements continue to push for safe leave policies that recognise the full scope of GBV’s impact on employment.  

Human rights NGOs and feminist organisations urge the necessity of improving policies to address gender-based violence, an increasing crisis even worsened by the gaps in social and legal protections. Civil society actors call on political institutions to change the current national policies and introduce paid safe leave provisions that would enhance the set of protection for survivors (ActionAid, France, 2019). Their exhortations have not fallen into the void. In the UK, the Labour Party has recently introduced a new proposal – the Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Bill – aimed at creating the right to 10 days paid safe leave for people experiencing domestic violence (The Independent, January 2025).

Paid domestic violence leave is a crucial element not only to support victims, giving them the time to find shelter, secure legal and social protection, ensuring their economic stability. Safe leave helps to acknowledge violence as a workplace issue, reducing stigma and aligning with human rights and gender equality provisions. Furthermore, it pushes employers to be part of the solution, encouraging them to take responsibility for their employees’ well-being.

Paid Leaves: A Perfect Plan or Plagued in Practice?

The issue of paid absences from work is one of significant importance and relevance as previously discussed in this article. All individuals must be able to participate within the workforce with no additional barriers, yet those who menstruate and those who need time off classed as ‘safe leave’ due to traumatic events of domestic violence still await comprehensive and inclusive leave policies. This section aims to explore and analyse the arguments for and against both paid period leave, and paid safe leave, such as key critics arguments on the unintended calcification of stigma via these, versus the proponent’s argument that this is outweighed by the benefits of an empowered and comfortable workforce environment that ensures all employees needs are met. Overall, there is validity to both sides, and while paid leave is crucial to accessibility and inclusivity of the job market, it is important to note that these policies alone will not solve the societal or medical issues that lie at the heart of potential drawbacks. 

Benefits

While these leaves differ, analysis of both provides clarity into the male-centric model of work which contains a multitude of barriers, in particular for women. “As feminist legal scholar Sandra Fredman (2013) argues, “such an approach [as found via period leaves] is needed to ‘engender’ socioeconomic rights and to challenge and transform structural barriers to women’s workforce participation.” There is growing awareness of the necessity of this  from international organisations such as the OCHR and the WHO as they noted in 2022 that menstruation should not act detrimentally to one’s access to work, and that one must be able to “live, study and work in an environment in which menstruation is seen as positive and healthy and not something to be ashamed of.” One barrier which may be removed therefore via period leave, is the issue of taboo within the workplace regarding periods. ‘Jessie’, an interviewee in a 2022 study noted that had she been aware of a company policy to access period leave then “I think I would’ve learned much earlier to take care of myself and that I didn’t have to deny my bodily function…It really could have transformed the way I thought about myself. It would’ve been a different kind of life.” (BBC, 2022.) For Jessie and approximately 1.8 billion women and girls of menstruating age, the removal of taboo is potentially life-changing. Indeed, the removal of taboo in this way means challenging the workforce to recognise the physiological needs and impact on women and all those who menstruate. Non-recognition of these needs forces an invisibility around those who menstruate, ignoring them entirely in male-dominated settings like the workplace. As noted by feminist recognition scholar Nancy Fraser (2013), “this type of inequality can manifest as nonrecognition. It may edge into then disrespect, when women are ‘routinely maligned or disparaged’ in everyday workplace interactions and negative gender stereotypes.” Subsequently, a significant benefit to paid period leave is injecting respect of period issues and therefore of menstruating peoples into the workplace. Safe leave, domestic violence, and violence against women and girls is widespread across Europe. Thus, having policies within workforces can provide a safety net for those impacted to be sure of both paid time off, and it builds an inclusive environment that seeks to support, once again lessening taboo surrounding these issues. Overall, a clear key benefit of these leaves is that it enshrines into companies but also into society an openness on these topics and can help empower those impacted to discuss that which they experience. 

Another benefit to these paid leave policies is that it further helps to enshrine and enact progression of human rights such as ICESCR articles 6,7, and 12 – the right to work and just working conditions, and the right to health. Period leave identifies menstruation as part of overall health and safe leave allows time to recover physically, emotionally, or mentally from assault. It also ensures that people can take the necessary time off without risking their pay or their employment. It also builds upon the UDHR and the CEDAW Freedom from Discrimination, protecting women and gender minorities from potential arising discrimination related to their need for time off.  As mentioned before these leaves challenge a male-centric model of work, and indeed ensure a gendered lens is applied to human rights in policy and in practice as they promote dignity, gender equity and equality, and economic security. 

The economic and financial argument is often used to negatively remark on paid leave, however if looking into retention rates around menopause, it can be seen that having a lack of comprehensive understanding of the needs of a diverse workforce causes a dropout rate around menopause. Not only does this act as a deterrent to menopausal women (which is an area that deserves analysis in its own right), it showcases that there exists a mentality surrounding work which  again utilises a nonrecognition pattern towards women and those who menstruate. It also  showcases that a lack of gendered analysis on paid leave has negatively impacted companies as they lose employees. Companies would arguably benefit from paid leave policies too; allowing for paid leave instead of employees ‘powering through’ which can serve to decrease the quality of work, this leave would improve presenteeism and boost work quality. Therefore both employee and employer benefit. This can also help companies stand out from competitors and may help attract more employees in the future.  Moreover, as will be discussed later in more depth, despite Spain offering paid period leave, it is not overused by employees and therefore would not be a cost-heavy burden upfront on companies. If we take Northern Ireland’s safe leave policy for example, they offer 10 days paid per annum, a cost entirely placed upon the employers. With over 32,000 cases of domestic violence occurring in NI between 2023 and 2024, one may be apprehensive about the cost of providing safe leave. However, these high rates simply underline how important this leave is for fostering an open environment as mentioned previously but also for further financial reasons. It can help enable a victim to foster economic independence from their abuser, prevents additional strain on welfare programs and shelters if they have a steady income due to the job security, helps them to seek help earlier therefore preventing more intensive injuries with a higher healthcare cost, and may increase retention rates as they do not need to quit / relocate etc. (NI Assembly, 2024, DOE, 2024.) All of these act as benefits, some immediately to the employer and others to wider society. One cannot refute there exists an overwhelming amount of potential economic benefits of paid safe leave. 

Pitfalls

One concern is that period leave reinforces stereotypes that women are ‘weaker’ on their period. Provisions that are needed for equity should be provided, although there may be validity in the fear that this serves to solidify stigmas around women in the workforce and this may impact treatment.  One issue that follows on from this is even if it was provided and regulated for, would menstruating people feel comfortable and empowered to utilise period leave? Spain has seen low uptake of their policy, which may stem from issues such as societal stigma and prevailing judgment from employers which solidifies stereotypes and can halt career progression (The Guardian, 2024). Even if there are no negative repercussions, how do we ensure those needing to use it feel confident enough to do so? How do we safeguard against any rise in discrimination as a result? These are valid concerns, however they expose that the issue lies not within the policies themselves but within society. They must be accompanied with greater and wider societal change, and these policies are just a first step of many. 

Another key issue pervading both leaves in practice is that of bureaucracy and limited access. If we take Spain, for example, to access paid period leave you must be able to provide the necessary medical documentation requirements, including the need for both a doctor’s note and a diagnosed menstrual condition, yet it takes years for some to be diagnosed with reproductive issues such as endometriosis etc. This is time-consuming and costly which limits accessibility. Further to this, if a woman or menstruating person experiences a once-off extremely painful period, they are not eligible for the leave which undoubtedly minimises its effectiveness and accessibility. Safe leave suffers from similar issues of bureaucracy, in so far as what evidence can be used to qualify and to what standard is this evidence held to? Does a person have to have a police, medical, or court report or a letter from a case worker? Some victims and survivors may not wish to engage via the police or courts, and having to access this may traumatise them again. 

Finally, there is a worry that if these leaves are not government sanctioned, and instead left to each individual company, those within more corporate jobs will be able to avail of these leaves, and those in service jobs will not. This would create, in effect, a hierarchy; one that ensures only a certain few women and gender minorities can access this leave, thus  undermining the need for the leave in the first place; which is equity/equality. The rolling out of paid period and safe leave should be from states and it should be uniform to prevent this.

Overview

Period leave overall legitimises the needed time off and ensures payment for this while not encroaching into sick leave. It improves inclusivity and removes taboo. It helps to develop our workforce past a male-centric model of work and removes barriers. It also can help reduce presentism and can boost the economy in the long run. However, these benefits are not without some drawbacks or challenges. Negative stereotypes surrounding women in the workforce may arguably become stronger, setting back decades of social progress. There is also the potential for employer discrimination, and even where this is not the case, will the fear of it ensure women are afraid to utilise it? If we do not address wider societal shame, stigma, and judgement then the policies will not be as successful as necessary. Furthermore, if bureaucracy increases the proof necessary to access these paid leaves, due to these hurdles it may discourage some employees from using it. This must become more accessible. Moreover, if not dispersed equally to all, then a hierarchy will form of those who can access  it, and those who cannot, enshrining  a class divide. 

Similarly, safe leave has the basis already created via the Victims Directive, ECHR Opuz v Turkey 2009, and by the case of Northern Ireland. All victims and survivors should be able to access such time off that does not encroach into holiday pay or sick leave, in particular this is key when we are witnessing high rates of VAWG across the globe. Policies that remove taboo, and creates a supportive environment, while providing necessary time for access to courts is paramount to supporting survivors and victims.

Period and safe leave on the surface seem to be a medical or legal issue, but it also entails broad societal issues. Both address the workplace to make it more equitable and fairer. Both need an accompanying shift in culture, as not just a singular policy will solve these issues entirely. Overall, the benefits are plentiful and make a strong case for these paid leaves to become implemented at the EU level, but concerns regarding bureaucratic hurdles, prevailing societal stigma, perceptions of economic benefits by companies, and the overall accessibility must be analysed and addressed first. 

Recommendations

Menstrual leave

In an ideal world, menstruation would be acknowledged as a legitimate health issue and therefore menstrual paid leave would be included in the European Union legislation and adopted by EU Member States. However, this is not the case.

However, some steps for action can be undertaken. Following Spain’s model, EU countries could introduce menstrual leave as part of national labour laws. This leave should be paid and easily accessible, without requiring excessive medical documentation, in order to avoid stigmatisation and discrimination. Some Member States are more reluctant to create separate period leave. In this case, a viable solution could be implementing policies aimed at reducing the burden that menstruation and menstruation disorders provoke to women (European Institute of Women’s Health, 2018).  An example is extending the sick leave coverage to menstrual conditions leading to severe pain – such as dysmenorrhea – without extra bureaucracy. A complementary action would be allowing remote work or flexible hours for employees experiencing severe menstrual pain or uncomfortable situations. In addition, the workplace should be equipped with rest areas and pain relief facilities to help employees to manage physical discomfort and menstrual hygiene products. Furthermore, it has been pointed out the importance of policymakers and stakeholders’ role in facilitating an open debate on the management of menstruation in the workplace in order to counteract menstrual discrimination in such contexts (European Institute of Women’s Health, 2018).

Menstrual disorders are widely misunderstood. This is why education is extremely important. Public interventions should focus on challenging and addressing the social stigma that affects menstruation in workplaces and educational contexts. Policies are useful and necessary, but they should go hand in hand with comprehensive awareness campaigns, menstrual health education programmes into school and workplace training programmes. This would sparkle discussions, dismantling myths and misconceptions surrounding menstruation. 

Safe leave

In the case of safe leave for domestic violence survivors, recommendations cover different lines of actions. First, the duration of the safe leave. Following the lead of New Zealand and Australia, employees experiencing domestic violence should be entitled to a minimum of at least 10 days of paid leave per year. According to their needs, survivors should be free to take the leave in installments or all at once. Secondly, it is crucial that the safe leave be paid in order to ensure economic stability to survivors. In addition, employment protections should be put in place in order to prevent possible retaliation in the workplace. Employees should be put in the position of safely rebuilding their lives, without fear of losing their jobs. Moreover, this leave should be flexible and extendable in exceptional circumstances, and linked to reintegration support following a period of leave (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2023).

Domestic violence does not end with the immediate crisis. Surrounding it, there are many implications, such as medical treatment, psychological support, relocating for safety, arranging childcare, and legal consulting. This means that national interventions should encompass safe leave provisions that guarantee such protection status in the long term.

In a similar fashion to addressing the underpinning issues surrounding paid period leave, in regards to safe leave, education and training is key. Educational and workplace policies should be improved, through the integration of updated safety plans, trained safe-person officers, and efficient reporting systems that respect the survivor’s privacy and confidentiality. Providing training and guidance to all relevant parties on domestic violence and gender-based violence is crucial to raise awareness and provide the right support. Furthermore, it is essential to set workplace domestic violence policy and communications about available help (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2023).

At the European level, there are no labour laws including a specific mandate for safe leave, generally considered as a subject for national governments. The EU legal and policy framework – including the EU Framework Directive on the safety and health of workers at work and the EU Strategic Framework on Occupational Safety and Health 2021-2027 – lacks specific actions on domestic violence. Only the Directive on common minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims (2012/29/EU) encompasses important measures for women victims of violence. The Directive generally states that any victim in the EU is entitled to a minimum level of rights, protection, support and access to justice. The creation of an EU Safe Leave Directive would represent a great step forward for gender equality, women’s rights and domestic violence survivors. Such a legal standard would be automatically introduced into national legislations, ensuring that all member states provide paid safe leave. 

Conclusions

The recognition of menstrual health and GBV as workplace issues reflects a broader struggle for gender equity in labour rights. Dysmenorrhea and other menstrual disorders impact millions, yet remain largely unacknowledged in workplace policies, forcing many to work through debilitating pain. Similarly, the lack of safe leave protections leaves survivors of domestic abuse and GBV economically vulnerable, preventing them from leaving unsafe environments. These intersecting issues highlight the urgent need for comprehensive, rights-based leave policies that acknowledge gender-specific barriers to full workforce participation.

While period leave and safe leave represent crucial steps toward workplace equity, debates persist over their long-term implications. Advocates view these policies as essential to dismantling structural inequalities, whereas critics warn of potential discrimination and reinforced stereotypes. However, history demonstrates that progress in labour rights often faces resistance before achieving mainstream acceptance. Ensuring the success of such policies requires robust anti-discrimination measures, employer education, accessible and universal healthcare and cultural shifts that normalise the realities of menstruation and gender-based violence.

Grounding these discussions within international human rights frameworks, such as the UDHR and the CEDAW, provides a legal and ethical foundation for action. These treaties emphasise the right to health, safety, and equal economic participation, reinforcing the legitimacy of workplace protections tailored to gendered experiences. As European nations continue shaping their approach to gender equality and labour rights, they must prioritise policy innovation, intersectional perspectives, and international cooperation. Effective period leave and safe leave policies are not merely legal provisions, they signal a broader societal transformation toward valuing women’s health, bodily autonomy, and the right to work free from harm. A truly inclusive workforce is one that acknowledges diverse lived experiences, fosters structural support mechanisms, and actively dismantles the barriers that have historically sidelined marginalised groups. The challenge now lies in translating these discussions into legislative action, employer commitments, and cultural change, ensuring that no one has to choose between their health and their livelihood.

Bibliography  

Amza, M., Findeklee, S., Haj Hamoud, B., Sima, R.-M., Poenaru, M.-O., Popescu, M., & Pleș, L. (2024). Dysmenorrhea and its impact on patients’ quality of life—A cross-sectional study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(19), 5660. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13195660   

BBC. (2022). Could menstrual leave change the workplace? https://www.bbc.com  

Benjamin, N. (2024). Responding to gender-based violence in the world of work in South Africa: Perspectives from the Labour Research Service (LRS). https://www.occhealth.co.za/_assets/articles/356/2533.pdf  

Birdsey, E., & Snowball, L. (2013). Reporting violence to police: A survey of victims attending domestic violence services (Australia, New South Wales) [Report]. NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. https://apo.org.au/node/37075  

Blackett, A. (2020). Introduction: Transnational futures of international labour law. International Labour Review, 159(4), 455–462. https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/intlab/v159y2020i4p455-462.html  

Camut, N. (2023, February 16). Spain approves paid menstrual leave, first country in Europe to do so. POLITICO. https://www.politico.eu/article/bill-europe-spain-parliament-creates-first-menstrual-leave-in-europe  

Center for American Progress. (2024, May 28). The state of safe leave. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-state-of-safe-leave/  

Center for Domestic Peace. (n.d.). Economic impact of domestic violence. https://centerfordomesticpeace.org/economic-impact-of-domestic-violence/  

CGT France et Action Aid France. (2019, June). Étude d’impact de la CGT, de CARE France et d’ActionAid France sur la ratification en France de la Convention 190 sur la violence et le harcèlement dans le monde du travail et sa recommandation. https://admin.actionaid.fr/uploads/downloadFile/502/Contre-%C3%A9tude%20d’impact%20ratification%20Convention%20190.pdf  

Colussi, S., Hill, E., & Baird, M. (2021). Engendering the right to work in international law: Recognising menstruation and menopause in paid work. Journal of Industrial Relations, 63(5), 568–584.  

Comisiones Obreras (CCOO). (2024). Informe/ Violencia machista en el puesto de trabajo: De la invisibilidad a la acción por la eliminación. Revista Trabajadora, 84(1). https://www.ccoo.es/noticia:710750–Informe_Violencia_machista_en_el_puesto_de_trabajo_de_la_invisibilidad_a_la_accion_por_la_eliminacion_de_Maria_Carme_Catalan  

Comyn Kellleher Tobin. (2023, December 7). The significance of the introduction of domestic violence leave in the Irish workforce under the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023. https://www.ckt.ie/news/the-significance-of-the-introduction-of-domestic-violence-leave-in-the-irish-workforce-under-the-work-life-balance-and-miscellaneous-provisions-act-2023/  

Days for Girls. (2023, July 30). The pros and cons of menstrual leave policies in the workplace: What organizations should know. Days for Girls International. https://www.daysforgirls.org/blog/the-pros-and-cons-of-menstrual-leave-policies-in-the-workplace-what-organizations-should-know/  

Dennerstein, L., Lehert, P., Bäckström, T. C., & Heinemann, K. (2010). The effect of premenstrual symptoms on activities of daily life. Fertility and Sterility, 94(3), 1059–1064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.08.059  

Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth – Government of Ireland. (2023, November 27). New right to domestic violence leave comes into force. https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/e6ecb-new-right-to-domestic-violence-leave-comes-into-force/  

Department for the Economy. (2024). Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Consultation. Retrieved from https://www.economy-ni.gov.uk

European Institute of Women’s Health. (2018). Women and menstruation in the EU. https://eurohealth.ie/policy-brief-women-and-menstruation-in-the-eu-2/  

European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC). (2021). Safe at home, safe at work: Trade union strategies to prevent, manage and eliminate workplace harassment and violence against women. https://www.etuc.org/sites/default/files/document/files/en_-_brochure_-_safe_at_home_1.pdf  

Forbes, G. B., Adams-Curtis, L. E., White, K. B., & Holmgren, K. M. (2003). The role of hostile and benevolent sexism in women’s and men’s perceptions of the menstruating woman. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27(1), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00007  

Futures Without Violence. (2023). Economic benefits of paid leave for survivors of domestic violence. https://policy.futureswithoutviolence.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Futures.NPWF-Fact-Sheet-5.12.23.pdf  

Gargarella, R. (2024). Argentina’s dangerous experiment. Verfassungsblog. https://verfassungsblog.de/argentinas-dangerous-experiment/  

Government of Ireland, Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023, Part 2, Amendment of Parental Leave Act 1998, point 7, https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2023/act/8/enacted/en/html

Huet, N. (2022, May 13). Spain’s menstrual leave: The countries that have already tried and tested days off for period pain. Euronews. https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/05/13/spain-s-menstrual-leave-the-countries-that-have-already-tried-and-tested-days-off-for-peri  

Ilic, M. (1994). Soviet women workers and menstruation: A research note on labour protection in the 1920s and 1930s. Europe-Asia Studies, 46(8), 1409–1415. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668139408412236

INPS Portal, Congedo indennizzato per le donne vittima di violenza di genere, 29 January, 2019, https://www.inps.it/it/it/dettaglio-scheda.it.schede-servizio-strumento.schede-servizi.congedo-indennizzato-per-le-donne-vittime-di-violenza-di-genere-52401.congedo-indennizzato-per-le-donne-vittime-di-violenza-di-genere.html

International Labour Organization (ILO). (2019). Convention 190: Convention concerning the elimination of violence and harassment in the world of work. Geneva: ILO. https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/nrmlx_en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C190  

Jane Pillinger. (2023). Domestic violence in the workplace – Discussion paper. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. https://osha.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Domestic-violence-in-the-workplace_en_0.pdf  

Johnson, P., & Gardner, S. (1999). Domestic violence and the workplace: Developing a company response. The Journal of Management Development, 18(7), 590–597. https://www.proquest.com/docview/216350301?sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals  

Johnston-Robledo, I., & Chrisler, J. C. (2013). The menstrual mark: Menstruation as social stigma. Sex Roles, 68(1-2), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0052-z

Joint Economic Committee (2022) Economic benefits of paid leave. Available at: https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/646d2340-dcd4-4614-ada9-be5b1c3f445c/jec-fact-sheet—economic-benefits-of-paid-leave.pdf 

Kassam, A. (2024, June 4). A year on, Spain’s ‘historic’ menstrual leave law has hardly been used. Why? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/04/spain-historic-menstrual-leave-law-hardly-used-period-pain-endometriosis  

Kinzerska-Martinez, L. (2020). #Ni Una Menos: Policy Approaches to Gender-Based Violence in Central America. University of California. https://www.proquest.com/openview/b5762371851e2e894f9f5de3c0cbb69c/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=51922&diss=y

Levitt, R. B., & Barnack-Tavlaris, J. L. (2020). Addressing menstruation in the workplace: The menstrual leave debate. In C. Bobel, I. T. Winkler, B. Fahs, K. A. Hasson, E. A. Kissling, & T.-A. Roberts (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical menstruation studies (pp. 561–575). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0614-7_43  

McFerran, L. (2011). Safe at home, safe at work? National domestic violence and the workplace survey. Sydney: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse. https://apo.org.au/node/27394

National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) (2018) The economic costs of intimate partner violence. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6161830/ 

New Zealand Legislation, Domestic Violence – Victim’s Protection Act 2018 https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2018/0021/latest/DLM7054315.html

Nisha Varia, Bénédicte Jeannerod, France Lags in Workplace Protections Against Domestic Violence, 29 June 2021, Human Rights Watch website, https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/06/29/france-lags-workplace-protections-against-domestic-violence

Northern Ireland Assembly. (2024). Department of Justice – New Domestic and Sexual Abuse Strategy. Retrieved from https://www.niassembly.gov.uk

Ouédraogo, R., & Stenzel, D. (2021). The heavy economic toll of gender-based violence: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa (IMF Working Paper No. WP/21/277). International Monetary Fund

Peggy Maguire, Teresa Keating, Kristin Semancik and Vanessa Moore,  Policy Brief: Women and Menstruation in the EU, 2018, European Institute of Women’s Health, https://eurohealth.ie/policy-brief-women-and-menstruation-in-the-eu-2/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Personnel Today: “Take-up slow for Europe’s only state menstrual paid leave policy.” (2024, March 31). Retrieved from https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/take-up-slow-for-europes-only-state-menstrual-paid-leave-policy

Pillinger, J., ETUC Safe at home, Safe at work”- Italy, country case study, 2017, https://www.etuc.org/sites/default/files/document/files/italy_etuc_safe_at_home_safe_at_work_final_2017_0.pdf

Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) (2024) Domestic abuse statistics for Northern Ireland: 2023-2024. Available at: https://www.psni.police.uk/about-us/our-publications-and-reports/official-statistics/domestic-abuse-statistics 

Rachel B. Levitt and Jessica L. Barnack-Tavlaris, Chapter 43 Addressing Menstruation in the Workplace: The Menstrual Leave Debate, from The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Menstruation Studies, published online 25 July 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK565643/

Republic of the Philippines – Philippine Commission on Women, Republic Act 9262: Anti-violence Against Women and Their Children Act, 2004, https://pcw.gov.ph/republic-act-9262-anti-violence-against-women-and-their-children-act-of-2004/

Rydström, K. (2020). Degendering Menstruation: Making Trans Menstruators Matter. In C. Bobel, I. T. Winkler, B. Fahs, K. A. Hasson, E. A. Kissling, & T.-A. Roberts (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Menstruation Studies (pp. 945–959). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0614-7_68

Sandra Fredman, ‘Engendering Socio-Economic Rights’ in Anne Hellum and Henriette Sinding Aasen (eds), Women’s Human Rights: CEDAW in International, Regional and National Law (CUP 2013) 

Schmidt, V. (2007). Trade union responses to globalization: A review by the Global. Union Research Network https://www.ilo.org/media/325916/download

The Guardian: “Spain’s historic menstrual leave law is hardly used, with just 1,559 claims in 11 months.” (2024, June 4). Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/04/spain-historic-menstrual-leave-law-hardly-used-period-pain-endometriosis

UN Women. (2018). Turning promises into action: Gender equality in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: UN Women. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2018/2/gender-equality-in-the-2030-agenda-for-sustainable-development-2018

Vijeyarasa, R. (2024). Comparing Whose Laws? Interrogating Biases in Comparative Law and Scholarship Through the Lens of Domestic Violence Workplace Leave. International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 40(Issue 2), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.54648/IJCL2024010

WAVnet. (2024). The need for paid safe leave & model legislative language. https://vawnet.org/material/need-paid-safe-leave-model-legislative-language

Wheeler Richard, Call for law to give paid leave to people experiencing domestic abuse, The Independent, 06 January 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/domestic-abuse-paid-leave-work-b2674112.html

Widyani, I. D. A. (2022). Menstrual Leave Policy; Between Gender Sensitivity and Discrimination Against Female Workers. Technium Business and Management, 2(2), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.47577/business.v2i2.6754

Workplace Relations Commission, Domestic Violence Leave, 8 December 2023, https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/what_you_should_know/leave/domestic-violence-leave/

World Bank (n.d.). Proportion of women who have ever experienced intimate partner violence (%) [Gender Data Portal.] https://genderdata.worldbank.org/en/indicator/sg-vaw-1549-zs

World Bank (n.d.). Proportion of women aged 15–49 years subjected to physical and/or sexual violence in the last 12 months (%). [Gender Data Portal]. https://genderdata.worldbank.org/en/indicator/sg-vaw-1549-zs