By Marshall Miller and Dorian Solot

It's sadly ironic that after Vermont's civil union law made it a national leader in recognizing same-sex relationships, the University of Vermont has made a decidedly regressive change to its domestic partner benefits policy.

The same-sex partners of UVM employees have been eligible to receive health benefits through the university since 1993. Last week, though, the school announced that partners will now be required to register a civil union in order to continue to receive benefits ("UVM requires civil unions for benefits," Oct. 11). This change reveals that UVM has missed the point behind offering family benefits.

Nationwide, fully 92% of domestic partner benefits plans are open to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, setting UVM in a small minority. These inclusive policies serve the important purpose of recognizing the broad diversity of families that exist today and providing equal pay for equal work. Benefits experts point out that an employee's benefits package typically make up between 25% and 40% of his or her total compensation. Why should married and CU'd employees earn so much more than everyone else?

Obviously, there are good reasons that the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Organization for Women, many chapters of the American Association of Retired Persons, and the American Association for Single People support domestic partner policies that include both same-sex and opposite-sex couples -- without requiring anyone to register at City Hall.

Vermont's state employees benefits program uses this kind of gender-neutral definition, as does Ben and Jerry's, the cities of Burlington and Middlebury, and Fletcher Allen Health Care. St. Michael's College in Colchester is even more supportive of the diversity of its employees' families, allowing them to add to their insurance policies a dependent who could be a parent, foster child, or a same-sex or opposite-sex unmarried partner.

UVM's same-sex only policy was undoubtedly based on the theory that the university needed a temporary way to treat gays, lesbians, and bisexuals fairly until same-sex marriage was legalized.

It was a short-sighted approach, as seen by the surprise and disapproval expressed by some UVM employees when the civil union requirement was announced last week.

There are a wide range of political, religious, financial, and philosophical reasons why couples of any sexual orientation might choose not to marry or register a civil union. While some fear that allowing "unregistered" couples to sign up for benefits will lead to employees signing up roommates and strangers, this hasn't proven to be a concern. Under most domestic partner plans, partners sign an affidavit saying that they meet the employer's requirements (such as having lived together a certain length of time, being legally or financially interdependent, intending to remain together indefinitely, etc.). To date, no instances of domestic partnership fraud have been reported anywhere in the country. Besides, does UVM require married couples to bring in their marriage licenses to prove that the person they claim is their spouse isn't really just a roommate?

The University of Vermont has sent the message to its employees that if you're not married or CU'd, you're not welcome here. Yet you don't need a marriage license or a civil union to be part of a family or a loving, committed relationship. UVM employees deserve equal pay for equal work regardless of their marital or CU status.

Marshall Miller and Dorian Solot are the founders of the Alternatives to Marriage Project (www.unmarried.org), a national organization for unmarried people of all sexual orientations.

This article appeared as guest commentary in the New England newspaper In Newsweekly on October 25, 2000.