
A media company in Mumbai is giving women a day off during their periods - urahara
https://qz.com/1026185/culture-machine-a-media-company-in-mumbai-is-giving-women-a-day-off-on-day-1-of-their-periods/
======
fredley
Stuff like this, while done with good intentions, can threaten to entrench
discrimination by having different sets of rules and expectations for people
based on their gender. A better solution would be to give 12 extra holiday
days per year to everyone, but make it known that it's acceptable to take them
under those circumstances.

~~~
bigmanwalter
Men don't get a day of pain and cramps each month so I don't see why we should
get the day off. Periods aren't fun, and I don't think men deserve a day at
the golf course in exchange.

~~~
fredley
It's a tricky one, but on the whole I'm against 'positive' discrimination.
It's still discrimination, it can still create contempt and undermine hard
work (they're only in that job because they're [a], a smarter [b] probably
didn't get the job, etc.)

It applies to maternity/paternity leave too. Until maternity and paternity
leave are required to be equal by law, there will be a bias against hiring
women, due to the simple mathematics. If the 'risk' is equal for a man or a
woman, the bias is eliminated.

~~~
BearGoesChirp
Even if men and women are given the same amount of leave, there are still two
problems. First, social norms lead to men and women not using it equally.
Second, single individuals don't have equal access given that society has a
significant gender disparity in single parents, that men can't get pregnant,
and that even if the leave is equal for adoption, there is still
discrimination in adoption.

------
dsfyu404ed
Nobody is going to take advantage of this because "Oh btw, I'm on the rag so I
won't be in today" isn't exactly the message you want to broadcast to your
coworkers.

Then there will be the people who take advantage of this on Mondays and
Fridays leading into long weekends.

Then everyone will hate the policy.

Then they'll extend the extra 12-days to everyone because you can't take back
something like this when you market it this way.

Then nothing will get done on Mondays and Fridays leading into long weekends.

~~~
swiley
Are long weekends really such a bad thing?

------
Swizec
Question for the women ou there: Do you perceive this as a magnificent idea or
as implying women have a periodic weakness that impacts their performance
every month?

Do you think this sort of policy feeds into wage gap stuff, or fights against
it?

As a reasonably feminist guy, I can't decide how to feel about this. It seems
like it's implying women can't work one day of every month, and also seems
like a great idea because dealing with office folk while in pain is not fun.

Do you think a policy like this works better (only?) in a predominantly female
company?

~~~
Everula
hey, personally I do feel really bad in the first day and when I need to go to
work I always think "I wish I could stay at home and work from there", so it
really impacts my performance and from one side it is indeed a great idea, but
it is sexism towards men - they also feel bad from time to time, so why not
unify this practice for all and just give more paid day-offs / sick leaves, as
was already mentioned in the comment above. Also, I am not very comfortable
letting everyone in the company know when the period starts and gossip about
that (yes, this is also a topic for gossip).

------
quirkot
Half the women in my office have their schedules synced up. A policy like this
could create a monthly ghost town

~~~
throw_throw
I think that's mostly a myth.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_synchrony](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_synchrony)

------
dgudkov
In an ideal world where employer and employee trust each other it would be a
great option for women who need it (not all women do) and a right thing to do.
In the real world, where the level of trust is low, and sexism (both male and
female) has become an extremely toxic topic, I don't see how this can work.
Maybe only in small family-type companies.

------
DanielleMolloy
Geez. Completely wrong direction (and probably just marketing) with underlying
sexism.

Female here. Just want to state that it is not nearly as bad for most women
most of the time. And effects vary quite a bit, quite a few even get an energy
push around day one. (Disclaimer: Your or your friends' mileage may vary.)

------
artificialidiot
I fully support letting people go home when they are objectively
counterproductive.

------
r3ign_codes
Why not give women 12 extra days of work from home (when applicable) for a
year and see how it goes rather than setting up different rules for different
genders? Or am I missing something here?

~~~
ErikVandeWater
Your suggestion is different rules for different genders?

~~~
b3lvedere
There is no shame in that, given that it is well defined. For instance. In
almost all sports you have a male and a female devision. Just based on pure
strength or something.

Call it what you want. There ARE differences in various humans. Some are male,
some are female, some have kids, some don't, some have two legs, some don't,
etc.

Want to give them all equal chances? Listen to what they can and experience
and get them to listen to each other for mutual respect.

~~~
LunaSea
So based on these differences, women should thus work more hours then men
since they have less strength in manual work.

------
ryanx435
interesting. If this ever became law, it would incentivize hiring men over
women because you'll get 5% less value out of hiring a woman employee.

the math: lets assume that there are 260 working days in a year. women get 12
extra holidays per year for their periods, which means they only work 248 out
of the 260 days. 248/260 = 95.4%.

very interesting indeed.

~~~
robertlagrant
Maternity leave in theory has the same disadvantage, as generally women take
this more than paternity leave (though I think that's changing) - it can be
combatted by public denigration of companies that consider men to be
preferable hires on the basis of lower risk of disruption and lower costs.

Thus I don't think it'd be a problem.

~~~
BearGoesChirp
>it can be combatted by public denigration of companies that consider men to
be preferable hires on the basis of lower risk of disruption and lower costs.

Was this said in sarcasm? I feel like it was, but I'm not a good judge of when
sarcasm is used.

~~~
robertlagrant
Which bit sounds sarcastic?

------
epx
My wife has two very bad and painful days (the first two) every period. I am
not sure how she would handle if she had a job.

~~~
ygra
Sick leave? As far as I know that's exactly what it's for. It also has the
benefit of not discriminating whether it's period cramps, migraines, a broken
leg, food poisoning, or depression.

EDIT: I'm German. Sick leave is completely separate from vacation days here
and not limited (although you get less money after six weeks because your
health insurance takes over from your employer). Generally I find that one of
the only acceptable solution to the problem at hand. Giving half your
employees extra days off is a bad idea, conflating vacation and sick leave is
a bad idea, and forcing employees to come to work when they're unable to is a
bad idea.

~~~
falcolas
Speaking for myself (as a standard US employee with a "progressive" HR, I mean
Human Asset Management dept), I get 0 sick days. I get three weeks (15 days)
which is supposed to be for both vacation and sickness. Someone who can't work
two days a month would either be fired or be taking leave without pay, and
never able to take paid vacation.

~~~
DropbearRob
I feel very sorry for you and others in your position to hear that.

the UK has some very forgiving policies on sick leave
([https://www.gov.uk/taking-sick-leave](https://www.gov.uk/taking-sick-
leave)). in fact you don't even have to provide a doctors note if you take
just a couple of days off.

------
jlebrech
well intentioned but this could lead to "tests" for women that have issues in
that area when the boss thinks she's cheating the system.

but giving them 2 extra days to take at their leisure isn't a bad idea imho.

but then that would lead to less pay in some instances.

------
Traubenfuchs
That's sexism though.

~~~
matt4077
Now I'm wondering if you consider it sexist against men, who are denied this
benefit. Or against women, who are (once again) stereotyped as weak and
unreliable?

I guess the answer is "both". But I can't shake the feeling that this is
actually much worse for women than it is for men.

In principle, I don't even have a problem with some groups getting a few more
days off, or other special arrangements. Some countries have rules for
minority religions, for example, allowing them to celebrate their respective
holidays. But I can't really imagine any women thinking that this would be a
good idea.

~~~
jhasse
It's sexist as it gives people an advantage based on their sex. This is unfair
for:

* women who are in pain more than one day a month because of their periods

* men who have prostate troubles or other illnesses exclusive to men

And it gives an unfair advantage to:

* women who aren't in pain during their periods

* women who have their period less than once a months (for example because of the Pill)

The criterion to get the day off shouldn't be "are you women?" but "are you in
pain?". They probably chose the former because they think it correlates that
much.

------
known
Let women decide on women issues #HappyToBleed
[http://menstrupedia.com/](http://menstrupedia.com/)

------
perseusprime11
My wife would love this if it were implemented here.

