Domestic benefits ping pong: IHEs claim benefits packages keep them competitive; some disapprove.
The University of Kentucky has also supported the idea of domestic partner benefits and expects to decide on a course of action early next year. In both cases the proposals were largely seen in a practical light, allowing the schools to offer competitive benefits packages that could help recruit and keep the best employees.
Not everyone, however, sees it that way. State Rep. Stan Lee (R-District 45) introduced a bill last month to stop the move. Lee's bill would prohibit any post-secondary institution from providing benefits to unmarried couples--whether they are of the same sex or the opposite sex.
By his reasoning, Kentucky voters rejected the idea of domestic partner benefits when they passed a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
A similar fight is under way at Michigan State University, where opponents say the school violates a state constitutional amendment by offering benefits. The 2004 amendment defined marriage "or any similar union for any purpose" as the union of a man and a woman, but at least seven other Michigan institutions currently provide benefits to same-sex couples.
And in Wisconsin, where the University of Wisconsin System has been seeking domestic partner benefits, voters approved a constitutional amendment last month that not only defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but also bars the state from granting legal status similar to marriage to unmarried individuals. Despite that, the UW System Board of Regents will likely ask lawmakers to provide domestic partner benefits for its workers. UW-Madison is the only Big 10 university that currently does not offer the benefits.
In all three cases, although the legality of the benefits programs has been challenged, few expect the schools to discontinue the packages, especially since similar benefits are becoming more common in the corporate world. Christine Gilgor, executive director of the Kentucky Fairness Alliance, believes the anti-benefits groups don't have the support to carry through on their challenge.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||BEHIND the NEWS|
|Date:||Dec 1, 2006|
|Previous Article:||Message (not) received.|
|Next Article:||Sound bite.|
|Groundbreaking held for new Columbia Law School residence. (Design and Development).|
|Marion Coutts. (Reviews: London).|
|Runners on starting block for annual EOP 5-K challenge.|