The introduction of menstrual leave for women, up to 12 days a year in some workplaces, has reignited an important national conversation about workplace fairness, gender equity, and modern labour policies. While many rightly support menstrual leave as a necessary health and dignity measure for women, a parallel question is increasingly being asked, often quietly but persistently: if women are granted this form of leave, what should men receive in return as an equivalent?
This is not a question rooted in jealousy, competition, or denial of women’s biological realities. Rather, it is a question of balanced policy-making, one that recognises that fairness in the workplace does not always mean identical treatment, but equitable recognition of different burdens, risks, and responsibilities.
Equality is not about biology alone
MENSTRUAL leave addresses a biological reality unique to women, and it should be acknowledged without hesitation. However, fairness in the workplace should not be reduced to biology alone. Men do not menstruate, but they do face distinct and well-documented health, social, and economic pressures that often go unrecognised and unsupported by formal policy.
Statistics globally, and locally, show that men are more likely to:
-Avoid preventive healthcare;
-Suffer silently from mental health issues;
-Work in physically demanding or high-risk occupations;
-Die younger from preventable diseases;
-Experience higher suicide rates; and,
-Carry financial and caregiving pressures without institutional support.
A fair workplace policy must respond to real-life burdens, not just visible ones.
The case for men’s wellbeing leave
Instead of attempting to create a biological equivalent to menstrual leave, which would be scientifically unsound and socially unhelpful, a far more practical and just approach would be the introduction of Men’s Preventive Health and Wellbeing Leave, equal in number of days, but different in purpose.
Such leave could allow men to:
-Attend medical check-ups (heart health, blood pressure, diabetes, prostate screening);
-Take mental health days for stress, anxiety, or burnout;
-Seek counselling without stigma; and,
-Recover from physical exhaustion caused by demanding work schedules.
This is not special treatment. It is preventive care, and prevention is always cheaper, healthier, and more humane than crisis management.
Mental health: The silent emergency
One of the strongest arguments for a male-equivalent leave lies in mental health. Men are culturally conditioned, especially in Pacific and traditional societies, to endure, suppress, and “stay strong” regardless of internal struggles. Asking for time off due to stress or emotional strain is still widely seen as weakness.
Yet the data tells a sobering story. Men account for the majority of suicide cases in many countries, including in our region. They are less likely to seek help early and more likely to reach breaking point silently.
A formal mental health or wellbeing leave for men would do more than provide days off. It would legitimise vulnerability, encourage early intervention, and challenge harmful stereotypes that men must endure at all costs.
Recognising men as caregivers, not just providers
Another overlooked reality is that men are increasingly active caregivers, fathers, sons caring for elderly parents, husbands supporting unwell spouses.
Yet workplace policies still lag behind social reality, often assuming men are available to work uninterrupted, regardless of family responsibilities.
An equivalent leave could also take the form of Family Responsibility Leave, allowing men to attend to caregiving duties without guilt, penalty, or stigma. This would not only support men but also promote shared responsibility within families and strengthen social cohesion.
Avoiding the trap of gender rivalry
What must be avoided at all costs is turning workplace policy into a gender competition. Framing the discussion as “women versus men” undermines the very principles of equity and inclusion that progressive labour reforms aim to promote.
Menstrual leave should not be questioned as a loss to men. Instead, it should serve as a starting point for a broader rethink of how workplaces respond to health, wellbeing, and human realities across genders.
True equality does not ask, “Why do they get this?”
It asks, “What does everyone genuinely need to function with dignity and health?”
A balanced way forward
If workplaces are prepared to grant 12 days of menstrual leave for women, then a reasonable, defensible, and socially responsible approach would be to offer men an equivalent number of days under a wellbeing, health, or family responsibility framework.
This approach:
-Preserves fairness without forcing false biological comparisons;
-Encourages preventive healthcare;
-Reduces mental health crises;
-Strengthens families; and,
-Promotes a culture of care rather than endurance.
Conclusion
The debate over menstrual leave should not divide us. Instead, it should push us toward more thoughtful, inclusive workplace policies that recognise different challenges without diminishing anyone’s experience.
Women deserve menstrual leave because their biology demands it.
Men deserve wellbeing and responsibility-based leave because their realities demand it.
Fairness is not about sameness. It is about balance, dignity, and justice for all.
Only when policy reflects this understanding can workplaces truly claim to be equitable, modern, and humane.
INDAR DEO BISUN is a former teacher at MoE and the assistant lecturer in Education at Fiji National University, and currently Short Course Trainer at Pacific Polytech. The views expressed herein are his own.
