Thursday, November 28, 2002

A story published today by the Herald-Sun reports that a group of Durham County employees is pushing for domestic-partner benefits similar to those now offered by the city government.

In the city government, unmarried heterosexual and homosexual partners who live with and share expenses with city employees are eligible for city health and dental coverage.

"I don’t know whether it is feasible or not," said County Manager Mike Ruffin. "We are trying to determine what are the issues with this kind of request."

"The main focus is the disparity between practice and policies," said Nancy Blood, a county employee for nearly 25 years. Both the county’s personnel ordinance and compensation policy spell out that Durham County does not discriminate against sexual orientation, although it refers to it as a preference of affection.

Not offering benefits could be a way to discriminate against gay and lesbian employees, she said.

The County Commissioners haven’t requested a formal review from the legal department, County Attorney Chuck Kitchen said, but since the issue has been floating around he has given it some thought.

"There are all kinds of different issues that come up with domestic partnership provisions," he said.

Some of the questions that would have to be answered are the scope of the policy, or who could be covered. Another is how to establish the employee has a domestic partner as opposed to a roommate without insurance, Kitchen said.

"At this point, I want to get that feedback on how this would fit into our benefits package and any legal issues," Commissioner Ellen Reckhow said. "It will be addressed, I can assure you of that."

According to Diane Juffras, an Institute of Government’s lawyer specializing in human resources legislation, there is nothing in the state law determining what local governments can offer to their employees.