Making the case for menopause support

Most employees lack workplace menopause benefits

Across the three regions we surveyed, workplace access varies when it comes to menopause support — such as medical insurance covering menopause treatments and therapies, a menopause policy that allows for flexible working and time off, adjustments to the working environment like cooling rooms, menopause education and awareness sessions, and access to menopause health professionals.

Employees in Canada (62%) are most likely to report that their organization does not offer any menopause benefits, followed by employees in the US (52%) and the UK (40%).

This shows that there is considerable room for growth in all three regions as the lack of menopause support is a significant issue impacting both employee wellbeing and overall workplace culture.² Without employer-offered support, many employees face additional stress and discomfort, which can affect their productivity, engagement, and satisfaction.³ Addressing the support gap by not only expanding benefit offerings but also ensuring access to qualified healthcare providers can help employees better manage their symptoms and foster a more inclusive environment that values health and wellbeing across all life stages.

A closer look: what combination of support do organizations offer?

The differences in how menopause support is prioritized and combined across regions highlight unique priorities and opportunities for improvement. This geographic disparity underscores an important reality: there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. Instead, companies must adapt their approach to regional needs and workplace cultures (e.g., openness to training and awareness sessions) while keeping their eyes on the ultimate goal — a holistic, inclusive framework for support.

In the US, the focus remains on healthcare benefits, with medical insurance being the most cited single benefit offered (39%). Among those with two benefits, medical insurance is most often offered alongside access to menopause-health professionals (35%). But while these benefits are essential, they are far from sufficient. Flexible working arrangements and organization-wide awareness training — critical tools for building true inclusion — often remain overlooked.⁴ Companies that prioritize these additional layers of support could gain a decisive edge in retaining and attracting top talent.⁵

Canada tells a slightly different story. Similar to the US, the country is building its foundation within the bounds of its healthcare framework. Employer offerings also prioritize healthcare-specific support. Among Canadian organizations that offer only one menopause benefit, 45% provide medical insurance. For those offering two benefits, the most common combination is medical insurance and access to menopause health professionals (25%). However, Canadian organizations that offer three benefits most frequently layer in awareness and education sessions for all employees, helping to build knowledge and skills that foster supportive workplaces. Yet, there is still a real opportunity to build a comprehensive menopause policy that allows flexible working and provides a framework for employees.

Given the context of a nationalized healthcare system and government-backed support for menopause support, companies in the UK diverge significantly from those in the US and Canada in how they prioritize menopause benefits. Organizations typically offer a menopause policy first (e.g., flexible working and time off) (37%) and then education and awareness sessions are layered on top (18%).

Menopause benefits matter for employees and businesses

Providing menopause benefits isn’t just about “accommodating” employees; it is about creating a workplace environment in which employees and businesses are able to reach their full potential — by acknowledging and supporting employees through life’s major transitions and milestones. We found that when organizations offer menopause support, employees experience positive outcomes — such as increased innovation,⁶ work engagement,⁷ and job satisfaction,⁸ which are beneficial for increased job performance and business profitability.⁹

Moreover, our data show that respondents are more likely to view their organization as menopause-friendly¹⁰ and supportive,¹¹ and to experience a greater sense of inclusion when at least one menopause benefit is offered¹² In workplaces with two or more benefits, these positive perceptions are highest, with 80% agreeing that their organization is menopause-friendly, 78% feeling supported as menopausal employees, and 36% frequently experiencing inclusion.

The data are clear. Investing in menopause support goes a long way toward building a culture that values wellbeing at every stage and maximizes positive employee outcomes and related business benefits as a result.

However, it’s troubling that even when organizations offer ample menopause support, only 36% of respondents experience a sense of inclusion. These are seasoned professionals who’ve contributed significantly to their organizations, yet the majority still feel sidelined, suggesting that a larger issue of gendered ageism may be at play.¹³ Gendered ageism — the intersection of age and gender bias — negatively impacts women’s careers and their experiences of inclusion.¹⁴ It’s a telling reminder that menopause benefits are only one part of the solution for supporting women in the workplace.

The path forward

Menopause is quickly emerging as a litmus test for how forward-thinking organizations approach employee wellbeing and inclusion.¹⁵ Indeed, since there are large benefits to providing key resources — even if just one benefit — organizations can begin to see meaningful gains. However, implementing a full suite of benefits will amplify those gains and distinguish organizations as an employer of choice.

Take action

One size does not fit all when it comes to menopause support. Cultural attitudes,¹⁶ industry norms,¹⁷ and employees’ unique experiences with menopause can all affect the types of support they need. This means that HR and benefits leaders must tailor menopause support programs to fit their particular organization. Here are a few actions to get started:

Lead with employee listening

Start by fostering a culture of listening that is both intentional and continuous. This approach allows you to uncover the unique challenges and needs of your employees and ensures your programs evolve to remain relevant and effective.

Talk to senior leaders

Building awareness and understanding among senior leaders is critical. Helping leaders see menopause as a workplace issue, rather than a personal one, enables them to take meaningful actions that improve employee wellbeing and drive organizational success.

Evaluate current policies and healthcare offerings to address menopause support need

Supportive policies and processes are foundational to a menopause-friendly workplace, ensuring that employees are treated fairly as they experience the menopause transition. Conducting a thorough evaluation of your policies and healthcare offerings will help determine whether there are any gaps in support and what your organization can do to fill them.

Educate employees and leaders to end the stigma around menopause

Provide resources for all employees on menopause awareness and train leaders to address this topic with sensitivity and openness. With education as a foundation, menopause benefits will become more visible and accessible, helping all employees navigate this transition with confidence and support.

How to cite: Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2025). Making the case for menopause support. Catalyst.

Endnotes

1. We surveyed 1,892 full-time employees in a variety of industries, with top representation from business and professional services (n = 103), education (n = 237), finance, banking and insurance (n = 116), government and military (n = 111), healthcare and medical (n = 326), manufacturing (n = 140), and retail (n = 128) industries in Canada (n = 573), the United Kingdom (n = 669), and the United States (n = 650). Our sample was mostly cisgender women (99%, n = 1,873) with some representation from other genders (<1%, n = 16) Almost half of the respondents were White (47%, n = 883) and our sample included representation from other racial and ethnic identities as well (e.g., Asian, Black, Indigenous, Latine, or multiracial employees; 53%, n = 998). Most respondents identified as heterosexual/straight (90%, n = 1,664), and our sample represented other sexual identities as well (e.g., asexual, bisexual, gay, lesbian, pansexual, or queer employees; 10%, n = 177). Participants were between the ages of 40 and 75 years old. The average participant age was 52 years old. Note that participants could skip demographic questions, so totals may not equal 100% or total sample size.
2. Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2024a). Menopause in the workplace: Stop the stigma. Catalyst; Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2024b). Menopause support helps attract and retain talent. Catalyst.
3. Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2024b).
4. Van Bommel, T. (2025). Remote-work options can boost productivity and curb burnout (2nd Edition). Catalyst.
5. Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2024b).
6. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) highlights the significant differences in employees’ sense of innovation when none, one, or two menopause benefits are offered at their organization, F (2, 1889) = 36.27, p < .001. Where Bonferroni post-hoc testing highlights a significant difference between organizations where no benefits are offered and organizations where two benefits are offered (p < .001), as well as when one benefit is offered versus two benefits (p < .001), but no significant difference when no benefits are offered versus one benefit is offered (p = .07).
7. A one-way ANOVA highlights the significant differences in employees work engagement when none, one, or two menopause benefits are offered at their organization, F (2, 1889) = 45.97, p < .001. Where Bonferroni post-hoc testing highlights a significant difference between organizations where no benefits are offered and organizations where two benefits are offered (p < .001), as well as when no benefits are offered versus one benefit is offered (p < .001), and when one benefit is offered versus two benefits (p = .03).
8. A one-way ANOVA highlights the significant differences in employees job satisfaction when none, one, or two menopause benefits are offered at their organization, F (2, 1889) = 46.46, p < .001. Where Bonferroni post-hoc testing highlights a significant difference between organizations where no benefits are offered and organizations where two benefits are offered (p < .001), as well as when no benefits are offered versus one benefit is offered (p < .001), and when one benefit is offered versus two benefits (p = .02).
9. Bryant, P. T. (2017). Are innovative companies more profitable? MIT Sloan Management Review; Sorenson, S. (2013). How employee engagement drives growth. Gallup; Kessler, S. R., Lucianetti, L., Pindek, S., Zhu, Z., & Spector, P. E. (2020). Job satisfaction and firm performance: Can employees’ job satisfaction change the trajectory of a firm’s performance? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 50(10), 563-572.
10. A one-way ANOVA highlights the significant differences in employee’s perception that their organization is menopause-friendly when none, one, or two menopause benefits are offered at their organization, F (2, 1889) = 79.31, p < .001. Where Bonferroni post-hoc testing highlights a significant difference between organizations where no benefits are offered and organizations where two benefits are offered (p < .001), as well as when no benefits are offered versus one benefit is offered (p < .001), as well as when one benefit is offered versus two benefits (p < .001).
11. A one-way ANOVA highlights the significant differences in employee’s perception that their organization is supportive of menopause employees when none, one, or two menopause benefits are offered at their organization, F (2, 1889) = 69.88, p < .001. Where Bonferroni post-hoc testing highlights a significant difference between organizations where no benefits are offered and organizations where two benefits are offered (p < .001), as well as when no benefits are offered versus one benefit is offered (p < .001), as well as when one benefit is offered versus two benefits (p < .001).
12. A one-way ANOVA highlights the significant differences in employee’s perception that their organization is inclusive when none, one, or two menopause benefits are offered at their organization, F (2, 1889) = 38.38, p < .001. Where Bonferroni post-hoc testing highlights a significant difference between organizations where no benefits are offered and organizations where two benefits are offered (p < .001), as well as when no benefits are offered versus one benefit is offered (p < .001), and a significant difference when one benefit is offered versus two benefits (p = .049).
13. Patterson, J. (2020, February 24). It’s time to start talking about menopause at work. Harvard Business Review.
14. Duffett, J. (2023). Inclusion at every stage: Addressing gendered ageism: Topic overview. Catalyst.
15. Menopause support in the workplace is smart business. Catalyst.
16. Smith, E. & Robotham, K. (2024). HR guide to global workplace menopause support. Catalyst.
17. Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2024c). Menopause support varies by industry: How does yours compare? Catalyst.
18. Allen, J. T., Laks, S., Zahler-Miller, C., Rungruang, B. J., Braun, K., Goldstein, S. R., & Schnatz, P. F. (2023). Needs assessment of menopause education in United States obstetrics and gynecology residency training programs. Menopause, 30(10), 1002-1005; Dintakurti, N., Kalyanasundaram, S., Jha, P., & Talaulikar, V. (2022) An online survey and interview of GPs in the UK for assessing their satisfaction regarding the medical training curriculum and NICE guidelines for the management of menopause. Post Reproductive Health, 28(3):137-141.
19. What is menopause? (2024, October 16). National Institute on Aging; Mikhail, A. (2022, June 15). Women are unprepared for the realities of menopause. Experts say that urgently needs to change. Fortune Well.
20. Robotham, K. & Smith, E. (2024a).