When the Supreme Court of India recently declined to mandate menstrual leave, it did spark some predictable reactions.

Some saw it as a missed opportunity. Others saw it as a practical decision.

The court’s stance brings up a few uncomfortable, but noticeable realities.

And that’s where the real conversation begins.

1️⃣The risk of reinforcing bias.
We’re all aware of the comment made while making this decision - “No one will hire women”.

In a country where workplace equality is still in its evolving stage, there’s a concern that additional mandated leave could influence hiring decisions - subtly or overtly.

2️⃣The gap between policy and practice.

Announcing a policy is easy. Creating an environment where people feel comfortable using it is much harder.

3️⃣The challenge of one-size-fits-all solutions.

Workplaces, roles, and individual experiences are too varied for a single mandate to work seamlessly everywhere.

None of this makes the need any less real.

If there’s one thread running through this entire conversation, it’s this - fear.

So even when policies exist, they often go unused. Or worse, they exist only on paper.

Instead of asking:
“Should menstrual leave exist?”

A better question might be:
“Are workplaces designed to handle human realities with maturity?”

Because menstrual leave is just one example of a larger issue —
how we respond when people aren’t operating at 100%.

Sometimes, it starts with how work itself is designed.

This goes beyond a single conversation.

Comfort at work isn’t created by adding more policies.
It’s created by removing the need to constantly explain yourself.

It’s about:

Most companies don’t struggle with introducing better policies. They struggle with making them usable.

Because these policies don’t exist in isolation. They exist inside teams, but cannot help much if the culture says otherwise. In an organization where this psychological safety does not exist, there’ll always be doubts.

These are questions most policies don’t answer.

That’s why the conversation can’t stop at whether we should introduce something.
It has to move toward what happens after we do.

For women-centric policies especially, the goal isn’t just provision. It’s confidence.

But maybe the more useful question is:

Are we building workplaces that people can navigate without fear?

Because without that, even the best policies stay unused.
And the real problem remains exactly where it is.

No judgment — just an honest reflection of reality.

If you’re open to sharing more, we’d love to hear how this actually plays out in your teams. The nuance behind these choices is where the real insight lies.

This year marks the centenary of Dr. Udai Pareek — the man who shaped how India thinks about people at work.

Long before HR became "strategic," he was building frameworks for trust, culture, and capability — designed for Indian organisations. Frameworks like OCTAPACE are still used today.

Earlier this year, I was nominated as a Dr. Udai Pareek Scholar by NHRD and the former Chairman of ISRO. I hadn't applied. I didn't expect it.

And it sent me somewhere I hadn't planned to go — back to his original work. Not summaries. Not second-hand frameworks. The source.

What I found there didn't feel dated. It felt… unfinished. Like work that was meant to be continued, not just remembered.

Over the next 12 weeks, I'll share one idea from his work each week. Because his centenary shouldn't just be a moment of recognition — it should start a conversation.

Next week in the Dr. Udai Pareek centenary series: before the frameworks — the teacher who shaped everything that came after.

— Kartik Mandaville, Founder & CEO, Springworks