FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 30, 2004

A coalition of eleven major organizations for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people (LGBT) say they are alarmed at some Massachusetts employers' plans to eliminate their domestic partner benefits programs. The groups urged Massachusetts employers to maintain their domestic partner (DP) benefits programs even though same-sex marriage is now legal in the state.

The LGBT groups signed a joint statement arguing that just as domestic partnership is not a substitute for marriage, neither is marriage a substitute for domestic partnership. "The two options serve different purposes for different people in different situations," the statement says. "Marriage and domestic partnership can and will continue to exist side by side."

The city of Springfield, MA, Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, and Babson College are among the employers who have announced plans to stop offering DP benefits, and others have said they are considering doing the same.

The LGBT groups' statement outlines six reasons why the signers believe DP benefits should continue to exist even though same-sex couples have the right to marry in Massachusetts. One of these reminds employers that, "Domestic partner benefits were originally invented to recognize family diversity in the workplace, not as a temporary solution until same-sex marriage was legalized." The benefits were intended to provide equal pay for equal work for both married and unmarried employees, the groups argue, especially given the growing diversity of the workplace and the significance of an employee's benefits package in his/her overall compensation. Ninety-two percent of employers offering DP benefits make them available to both heterosexual and LGBT employees, they point out, with no provision that says, "If you can marry, you must marry."

In response to employers who argue that cutting their DP plan is a cost-saving measure, the group cites several studies that find the cost to offer DP benefits is "negligible" or "minimal," increasing health care costs an average of 0.5% to 3%. Many employers find their competitive advantage in employee recruitment and retention easily covers the benefits' cost, according to the statement.

The statement also makes several points about the logistics of eliminating DP benefits. It reminds employers that that employees who do not live in Massachusetts may not yet have the right to marry a same-sex partner or to have their marriage recognized in their own state. "Employers who eliminate their domestic partner policies risk cutting off partners and children who are still dependent on the benefits," the statement says, and warns of the time and costs involved in administering different benefits plans for employees in different states.

The signatories also warn that same-sex marriage is not yet guaranteed for the long-term, despite their hopes that LGBT couples will soon have equal marriage rights in every state. They point to the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment which would make same-sex marriage unconstitutional, and remind employers that if they withdraw DP benefits prematurely, they "could regret this decision if they later have to re-establish them if same-sex marriage became unavailable."

The groups signing the joint statement include Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), which filed the lawsuit resulted in Massachusetts's groundbreaking decision to legalize same-sex marriage. The statement was also endorsed by the country's largest LGBT advocacy groups, including the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; by LGBT family groups, including the Family Pride Coalition, COLAGE (Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere), and PFLAG (Parents, Friends, and Families of Lesbians and Gays); and by LGBT legal groups Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and the National Center for Lesbian Rights. Other signers include the LGBT labor group Pride at Work, the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies (which published a major study on the costs of DP benefits), and the Alternatives to Marriage Project.

Read the joint statement.