Domestic Partnership News Archive
January 01 - January 06, 2001

Thursday, January 5, 2001

Houston council members divided over approach to domestic partner benefits

A story published today in the Houston Chronicle reports that the issue of whether the city should provide benefits for workers' unmarried partners was pushed to the forefront Thursday after a conservative councilman brought up the matter a day earlier at the City Council meeting.

Houston Councilman Rob Todd indicated that he opposed granting benefits to domestic partners of city employees. Councilwoman Annise Parker, who is on the committee looking into the matter said she supported such benefits for same-sex partners.

Councilman Carroll Robinson said he thinks the city should provide health insurance for anyone employees want to cover and choose to pay the premium for. That could include parents, cousins, even neighbors.

"I don't think there should be a heterosexual versus homosexual issue," he said. "I think it should be about expanding health care as much as possible."

Councilman Bruce Tatro said Robinson's proposal would cost the city too much. Tatro said he opposes unmarried partner benefits because there is no legal way to determine who is a domestic partner.

"The city should not adopt a policy which equates same-sex benefits to heterosexual . . . marriage," Tatro said.

The issue will come before the full council when it is asked to approve or reject a collective bargaining agreement in which the benefits package may be included.

Benefits for ‘significant others’ assume growing importance

A story published in today's issue of "Connect," a newsletter of benefits.com, says that benefit managers should note that gay and lesbian couples are not the only category of unmarried partners warranting attention in the formation of employer-sponsored benefits and HR policies.

Currently there are 8.5 million Americans living with an opposite sex partner, up from 878,000 in 1960, according to American Demographics magazine. While cohabitation remains an interim arrangement prior to marriage for many, a growing subsegment of between 1 million and 2 million people are said to be living with others in very committed, long-term relationships.

Demographers attribute the trend to society’s waning reverence for marital bliss and a growing emphasis on individual independence. It also appears to relate to the divorce rate, since two-thirds of all divorced people choose cohabitation over remarriage following a break-up.

Analysts say these individuals have a great but often unmet demand for tailored financial, legal, health insurance and other benefits, including work-life programs such as prenatal and day-care services.

An online survey conducted by the newsletter reported that 31% of respondents said that their employer did provide domestic partner benefits, while 69% said they were not available in their workplace.