Reimagining Maternity Rights in the Evolving Workplace: A Legal Mapping and Policy Proposal

Through the integrated process of legal research, policy construction, and critical analysis, the law should be appreciated more profoundly as a tool of distributive justice and social dignity rather than just a regulatory mechanism.

The research aims to explore how India’s labour system remains unable to meet the diverse needs of working women, particularly those in informal and non-traditional industries. It exposed the contradictions between formal protections and effective exclusions, most notably the employer-focused nature of Section 5(3) of the Act.¹ Our policy proposal, which is a rights based, gender-balanced, and state-funded maternity model, was rooted not only in constitutional law under Articles 14, 15, and 42² but also in international instruments such as CEDAW and ILO Convention No. 183.³

In promoting universal coverage, leave for fathers, social insurance financing, and digital enforcement capacity, the policy proposed a universal future of work that respects both reproductive work and equality in the workplace.⁴ Cases such as Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Worker⁵ and Neera Mathur v. LIC⁶ underscored the judiciary’s evolving role in bridging legislative intent and lived realities.

Specifically, Air India v. Nargesh Meerza⁷ was illuminating in showing how judicial review could break down patriarchal norms of employment. The Court’s declaration of Regulation 46(i)(c) of the Air India Service Rules⁸ as offending Article 14⁹ clarified that pregnancy could not be regarded as a disqualifying circumstance.¹⁰

Likewise, Neera Mathur v. LIC¹¹ extended the application of Article 21¹² to the realm of employment by declaring intrusive and discriminatory recruitment practices as invalid.¹³ These decisions added a further depth of understanding as to how constitutional values, dignity, equality, and privacy should permeate statutory construction, particularly with regard to gender and employment.

The core of the paper lies in its Creative Policy Proposal, titled: “Reimagining Maternity Benefit Law through a Rights-Based, Inclusive, and Gender-Equitable Framework“.
The proposal envisions five key objectives:

1. Ensuring universal coverage across employment classifications.
2. Shifting to a social insurance model involving tripartite contributions (state, employer, employee).
3. Introducing paternity and shared parental leave to promote gender-neutral caregiving.
4. Establishing digital grievance redressal and compliance platforms.
5. Aligning with international labour standards such as ILO Convention No. 183¹⁴ and CEDAW¹⁵ obligations.

Additionally, I was responsible for conceptualising and articulating the objectives of the policy proposal. This required a compromise between doctrinal consistency and policy innovation. Bringing the proposal in line with global standards like ILO Convention No. 183 and CEDAW, I questioned how maternity protection needs to shift away from welfare paternalism towards gender-equitable, state-backed, and inclusive arrangements.¹⁶

Through my contribution to the conclusion, I integrated the overarching themes of the paper—such as informalisation of work, discriminatory gaps in enforcement, and the undercoverage of employer-focused benefits—into a call for legally grounded constitutionally informed legal reform. These contributions honed my skill at converting normative legal understanding into practical legislative and policy reform, a skill I now identify as key to twenty-first-century industrial law practice.