🌟 Exclusive Amazon Black Friday Deals 2024 🌟
Don’t miss out on the best deals of the season! Shop now 🎁
Domestic Partner Benefits
- Thread starter Chaos
- Start date
InternationalShannon
Veteran
Thanks for clearing that all up, cuz now I can sleep.Domestic Partner= Married but can't call it that. Not best friends, not roomates, not your housekeeper.
SNN
birdinhann
Member
As someone posted before, company policy clearly states only same sex domestic partners qualify for health coverage. That has not always been the case however. As late as 2006 America West did in fact offer health care coverage to both same sex and opposite sex domestic partners. Before my wife and I were married, we met every and all qualifications and criteria for Domestic partnership set forth by the company and yet she still was denied coverage. I filed a grievance with the IAM and it went to step 3, only to be defeated. Below is the letter I presented and read during the 3 step grievance hearing. I think it sums it up nicely.
4/11/2007
To all parties concerned;
During open enrollment of last year (2006) I attempted to enroll my domestic partner into the US Airways health care program. My request for enrollment for my domestic partner was denied due to the fact that my domestic partner was and is of the opposite sex. US Airways offers every available benefit to opposite sex domestic partners with the exception of health care coverage, but that has not always been the case. As late as last year (2006) US Airways offered health care coverage to all domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex. The fact that US Airways has ceased health care coverage for opposite sex domestic partners is the basis of this grievance.
I subsequently filed this grievance with the IAM. Steps one and two of the grievance were both denied. The written response given by the company was that there were no violations of the Fleet Service Agreement. I contend that since our health care package is offered as part of our benefit plan contained within the Fleet Service Agreement, and since every employee group except opposite sex domestic partners are offered all benefits in the agreement, my denial of health care coverage for my opposite sex domestic partner it is a clear violation of the Fleet Service Agreement.
My domestic partner and I meet every criteria set forth by US Airways for domestic partnership. We have submitted all the proper documentation required including a signed and notarized Affidavit of Domestic Partnership Form. Since it is in essence and in fact US Airways who recognizes domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex, it is my contention that both should receive every benefit available to them. For US Airways to do otherwise is pure discrimination! My domestic partner and I are in fact and by choice in a legal and legitimate domestic partnership relation, and since US Airways recognizes the concept and/or status of domestic partnerships, I believe we should be accorded every benefit offered to same sex domestic partners.
In conclusion, I am being discriminated against by US Airways. I believe, in the spirit of fairness and inclusion, US Airways is ethically, morally and contractually obligated to provide every benefit it possesses to all of its employees, regardless of their martial status, race, color, creed, and/or sexual orientation. US Airways exclusion of opposite sex domestic partners from its health care coverage is discrimination, and simply put, unfair. It is my hope that the Labor Relations Manager in this grievance proceeding will reach the same conclusion.
Sincerely,
bird
4/11/2007
To all parties concerned;
During open enrollment of last year (2006) I attempted to enroll my domestic partner into the US Airways health care program. My request for enrollment for my domestic partner was denied due to the fact that my domestic partner was and is of the opposite sex. US Airways offers every available benefit to opposite sex domestic partners with the exception of health care coverage, but that has not always been the case. As late as last year (2006) US Airways offered health care coverage to all domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex. The fact that US Airways has ceased health care coverage for opposite sex domestic partners is the basis of this grievance.
I subsequently filed this grievance with the IAM. Steps one and two of the grievance were both denied. The written response given by the company was that there were no violations of the Fleet Service Agreement. I contend that since our health care package is offered as part of our benefit plan contained within the Fleet Service Agreement, and since every employee group except opposite sex domestic partners are offered all benefits in the agreement, my denial of health care coverage for my opposite sex domestic partner it is a clear violation of the Fleet Service Agreement.
My domestic partner and I meet every criteria set forth by US Airways for domestic partnership. We have submitted all the proper documentation required including a signed and notarized Affidavit of Domestic Partnership Form. Since it is in essence and in fact US Airways who recognizes domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex, it is my contention that both should receive every benefit available to them. For US Airways to do otherwise is pure discrimination! My domestic partner and I are in fact and by choice in a legal and legitimate domestic partnership relation, and since US Airways recognizes the concept and/or status of domestic partnerships, I believe we should be accorded every benefit offered to same sex domestic partners.
In conclusion, I am being discriminated against by US Airways. I believe, in the spirit of fairness and inclusion, US Airways is ethically, morally and contractually obligated to provide every benefit it possesses to all of its employees, regardless of their martial status, race, color, creed, and/or sexual orientation. US Airways exclusion of opposite sex domestic partners from its health care coverage is discrimination, and simply put, unfair. It is my hope that the Labor Relations Manager in this grievance proceeding will reach the same conclusion.
Sincerely,
bird
birdinhann
Member
As someone posted before, company policy clearly states only same sex domestic partners qualify for health coverage. That has not always been the case however. As late as 2006 America West did in fact offer health care coverage to both same sex and opposite sex domestic partners. Before my wife and I were married, we met every and all qualifications and criteria for Domestic partnership set forth by the company and yet she still was denied coverage. I filed a grievance with the IAM and it went to step 3, only to be defeated. Below is the letter I presented and read during the 3 step grievance hearing. I think it sums it up nicely.
4/11/2007
To all parties concerned;
During open enrollment of last year (2006) I attempted to enroll my domestic partner into the US Airways health care program. My request for enrollment for my domestic partner was denied due to the fact that my domestic partner was and is of the opposite sex. US Airways offers every available benefit to opposite sex domestic partners with the exception of health care coverage, but that has not always been the case. As late as last year (2006) US Airways offered health care coverage to all domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex. The fact that US Airways has ceased health care coverage for opposite sex domestic partners is the basis of this grievance.
I subsequently filed this grievance with the IAM. Steps one and two of the grievance were both denied. The written response given by the company was that there were no violations of the Fleet Service Agreement. I contend that since our health care package is offered as part of our benefit plan contained within the Fleet Service Agreement, and since every employee group except opposite sex domestic partners are offered all benefits in the agreement, my denial of health care coverage for my opposite sex domestic partner it is a clear violation of the Fleet Service Agreement.
My domestic partner and I meet every criteria set forth by US Airways for domestic partnership. We have submitted all the proper documentation required including a signed and notarized Affidavit of Domestic Partnership Form. Since it is in essence and in fact US Airways who recognizes domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex, it is my contention that both should receive every benefit available to them. For US Airways to do otherwise is pure discrimination! My domestic partner and I are in fact and by choice in a legal and legitimate domestic partnership relation, and since US Airways recognizes the concept and/or status of domestic partnerships, I believe we should be accorded every benefit offered to same sex domestic partners.
In conclusion, I am being discriminated against by US Airways. I believe, in the spirit of fairness and inclusion, US Airways is ethically, morally and contractually obligated to provide every benefit it possesses to all of its employees, regardless of their martial status, race, color, creed, and/or sexual orientation. US Airways exclusion of opposite sex domestic partners from its health care coverage is discrimination, and simply put, unfair. It is my hope that the Labor Relations Manager in this grievance proceeding will reach the same conclusion.
Sincerely,
bird
4/11/2007
To all parties concerned;
During open enrollment of last year (2006) I attempted to enroll my domestic partner into the US Airways health care program. My request for enrollment for my domestic partner was denied due to the fact that my domestic partner was and is of the opposite sex. US Airways offers every available benefit to opposite sex domestic partners with the exception of health care coverage, but that has not always been the case. As late as last year (2006) US Airways offered health care coverage to all domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex. The fact that US Airways has ceased health care coverage for opposite sex domestic partners is the basis of this grievance.
I subsequently filed this grievance with the IAM. Steps one and two of the grievance were both denied. The written response given by the company was that there were no violations of the Fleet Service Agreement. I contend that since our health care package is offered as part of our benefit plan contained within the Fleet Service Agreement, and since every employee group except opposite sex domestic partners are offered all benefits in the agreement, my denial of health care coverage for my opposite sex domestic partner it is a clear violation of the Fleet Service Agreement.
My domestic partner and I meet every criteria set forth by US Airways for domestic partnership. We have submitted all the proper documentation required including a signed and notarized Affidavit of Domestic Partnership Form. Since it is in essence and in fact US Airways who recognizes domestic partnerships, both same and opposite sex, it is my contention that both should receive every benefit available to them. For US Airways to do otherwise is pure discrimination! My domestic partner and I are in fact and by choice in a legal and legitimate domestic partnership relation, and since US Airways recognizes the concept and/or status of domestic partnerships, I believe we should be accorded every benefit offered to same sex domestic partners.
In conclusion, I am being discriminated against by US Airways. I believe, in the spirit of fairness and inclusion, US Airways is ethically, morally and contractually obligated to provide every benefit it possesses to all of its employees, regardless of their martial status, race, color, creed, and/or sexual orientation. US Airways exclusion of opposite sex domestic partners from its health care coverage is discrimination, and simply put, unfair. It is my hope that the Labor Relations Manager in this grievance proceeding will reach the same conclusion.
Sincerely,
bird
birdinhann
Member
Sorry about the DDouble post folks
It may be a form of discrimination in the pure sense of the word, but it is not ILLEGAL discrimination. It is not illegal under federal law to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, and federal law (ERISA) governs employee benefits and preempts any state or local laws which would make this policy unlawful.
Now, from an HR perspective, this may or may not be a wise policy. (An opposite-sex couple can simply get married and avoid the problem, which is an option not available to same-sex couples in most states.) But it is not illegal discrimination.
Proof it. You legally can’t. I thing it’s an EAST/WEST thing. Or maybe a republic /democrat thing. Or maybe a cost neutral thing.Domestic Partner= Married but can't call it that. Not best friends, not roomates, not your housekeeper.
lildutchgrl
Advanced
- Apr 4, 2007
- 184
- 0
I have many friends that are opposite sex domestic partners that get health benefits with other companies. As long as they prove the partnership, they are afforded all benefits as a married couple without a piece of paper. Nearly every corporation in California has domestic partner benefits, whether it be same or opposite sex. I think this is a USAirways preference, as they probably think it would cost them too much money to provide health care for couples living together in a committed relationship.
Example: My friend is Catholic and she got married young and ended up getting a divorce a few years later. She became a flight attendant and met a wonderful guy. They have been together for 6 years, however she cannot get married in the Catholic Church unless she gets an annulment, which is expensive. They don't plan to have kids, so marriage is not their top priority. They own a house together and she even legally changed her name to his, however he cannot get on her health benefits because they don't have a piece of paper saying they are married. It is not fair.
Example: My friend is Catholic and she got married young and ended up getting a divorce a few years later. She became a flight attendant and met a wonderful guy. They have been together for 6 years, however she cannot get married in the Catholic Church unless she gets an annulment, which is expensive. They don't plan to have kids, so marriage is not their top priority. They own a house together and she even legally changed her name to his, however he cannot get on her health benefits because they don't have a piece of paper saying they are married. It is not fair.
