Bay Windows - National News, September 23, 1999
Beth Berlo, Bay Windows staff

In a deposition related to the domestic-partnership complaint, Connolly said he, "would have a problem" with gays working in child care because they may, "proselytize the children [or] convince them that the lifestyle was one they may want to follow."

After the remark received widespread criticism both in and outside the school, Chancellor Mark Nordenberg said during a Senate Council meeting Sept. 13: "I want to make clear from the outset that I never have heard Mr. Connolly express those reservations, that I do not share those reservations, and most importantly, that those personal reservations are not reflected in institutional policies or practices. To the contrary, we do not screen on the basis of sexual orientation for any of our educational or employment opportunities, whether they relate to child care or not."

Though other universities and companies have proven that offering domestic partnership insurance benefits to employees cost no more than costs covering married spouses, U-Pitt's not budging.

"Cost is not the major reason," says Ken Service, university spokesperson. "What's more important is that we are a state-related

institution," he said. "We receive about $160 million annually in state appropriations as part of our budget." Service said the Pennsylvania Legislature has made it clear that it is unwilling to expand the legal definition of marriage to include same-sex relationships.

But in a university statement released earlier this month, cost appeared to be a primary element in its decision. "The cost of providing such benefits would be substantial," administrators contended. "The university has been told by its health insurance consultants that offering these benefits could result in an immediate base premium increase of up to $308,000. An additional [$750,000] would be required for every 10 percent of the 3,292 employees now receiving individual benefits who chose coverage for either a same-sex or opposite-sex domestic partner."

According to Andrew Sherman, senior vice president of The Segal Company, an employee benefits actuarial and consulting firm, there is a growing trend among universities and companies across the nation, but especially in Boston and Massachusetts, to extend DP benefits to employees.

"Boston and Massachusetts have been on the forefront of these issues," Sherman, who's with Segal's Boston office, said. "But one of the key issues in Pittsburgh is that the insurance carriers want to impose a surcharge which Massachusetts companies had done initially."

Insurance companies in the Bay State no longer impose any surcharges, he added. "I believe that this is the result of an insurance carrier here in Massachusetts having several years of actual claims information and data and realizing that domestic partners are no more expensive to insure than married spouses and, in fact, domestic partners may be less expensive."

Nonetheless, cost concerns continue to be a red flag for reluctant employers and universities, hampering them from moving to extend DP benefits. Some worry that a disproportinate number of HIV and AIDS-related claims will spike DP costs.

An employee of the San Francisco Human Rights Commission (SFHRC) said that that conception has "proved unfounded." Cynthia Goldstein, contract complicance officer with the SHHRC, added, "A lot of people with HIV stick with their insurer. "And the actual claims experience of someone with HIV is not any higher than other major health problems."

Sherman concurred with Goldstein, saying, "There is absolutely no data to back that up as a valid concern. In fact, AIDS and HIV are much less expensive than many other illnesses or medical conditions including, premature infants, lung cancer, and other diseases."

As reported in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Sept. 20, some employers say it's not a question of whether DP benefits should be offered. "It's not something we want to stop offering because we want to be competitive," said Lori Kobayashi, benefits manager at Fore Systems, which has provided benefits to domestic partners for at least the past six years.

"Most of our competitors are on the West Coast," she said. "In the Pittsburgh area, it's a very progressive benefit to give employees, but in California it's [more common]."

In Boston, all but two of the city's major universities extend DP benefits to their employees. Among the colleges that do: Tufts, Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, Emerson, and Lesley; not doing so are Boston College and Boston University. Asked why he thinks BC and BU continue to resist, Sherman refused to speculate.

Kim Mills, education director at the Human Rights Campaign, said there are currently 99 colleges and universities across the country that extend DP benefits.

Though a complaint has been brought against the University of Pittsburgh by a former employee who seeks to overturn the university's decision not to provide health insurance benefits to partners of gay and lesbian employees, Service said, "It's a little hard to understand why we've been singled out when no one else has."

While enrollments in DP insurance plans continues to grow slightly, Sherman said overall enrollments are low. One reason, he thinks, could be traced to tax implications.

"When employees include their domestic partners on their benefit program, they have to pay additional income tax on the value of the coverage," he said. "Therefore, if individuals are in a domestic-partner relationship, it's economically advantageous for them each to get benefits from their own employer." Of the companies who do extend DP benefits, less than two percent of employees enroll, he said.

Asked if there were any advantages for companies who do extend DP benefits, Sherman said, "Companies are finding that by including domestic partnership benefits in their programs, it brings a number of very positive effects with very little costs." It's also being used as a good recruiting and retention tool, especially he said, during good economic times.

"Employees are hearing from married employees who don't need domestic partner coverage,and who are saying that the inclusion of DP programs is a good way to gauge corporate culture."

Pitt has challenged Pittsburgh's non-discrimination ordinance as part of its legal strategy to battle the complaint filed by the former employee.
990923
BY990907

Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 1999. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.

AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.

Copyright ©1980, 1999. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .