FORMER senator Panfilo Lacson yesterday said a proposal at the House of Representatives to grant paid menstrual leaves may do more harm than good to the ordinary working woman whose rights it is supposed to uphold.
He said the effect of the additional paid leave may lead to layoffs or even closure of some factories.
“What the proponents of the two-day-a-month menstrual-leave-with-pay measure and the ordinary working woman in this country may not realize is the impact of an additional 24 days a year of leave with pay on top of the 105 days of maternity leave, seven days of paternity leave, five days of sick leave, including the 13 to 18 days of vacation leave per year (convertible to cash if unused) which could lead to layoffs or even the closing some factories that may not have the wherewithal to cope with the burden of complying with all these privileges,” Lacson said.
Last week, Rep. Arlene Brosas of the Gabriela party-list group filed a measure that seeks to grant a paid two-day “menstrual leave” per month. Brosas said women should be provided with the flexibility and support they need to manage their reproductive health without fear or negative consequences such as losing pay, falling behind in work, or facing disciplinary action. She said menstrual leaves have also been introduced in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, and Spain.
Lacson said that while he is all for upholding the rights of women, there are other ways to do this without causing joblessness.
He said the proposed bill may sound good, but the harsh reality is that it may discourage long-term investments to prospective employers.
“It is good to be pro-labor especially among the 49 percent women population, but we should also take into consideration the long-term effect on the country’s investment climate in particular and the economy in general,” he said.
“We should look at the forest, not the trees,” he added.
