|
November 9, 1995, Leadership U.:
Thursday, November 9, 1995, the MSU Board of Trustees met in a special
session to consider a proposal that MSU provide Domestic Partner Benefits
to its employees. The session included an Open Comment time, where members
of the public could speak for five minutes on this issue. Most of the
people who signed up to speak were members of the Alliance of
Lesbian-Bi-Gay Students. They urged MSU, as the nation's Premier Land
Grant Institution, to vote in favor of extending benefits to Domestic
Partners.
Instead, the Board of Trustees voted to keep the current policy of providing benefits only to married couples. MSU President Peter McPherson, while affirming MSU's commitment to prevent discrimination on any basis, including sexual orientation, also recommended that the Board not extend benefits to Domestic Partners. The first four members of the Board of Trustees to speak voted in favor of a motion to leave the current policy intact and not extend benefits to Domestic Partners. Since at least five Trustees needed to vote in favor of the change in order for it to pass, that effectively blocked the proposal. Trustees Colleen McNamara and Dorothy Gonzalez voted in favor of the proposal. Trustee Robert Traxler, who along with Trustee Robert Weiss, had not yet voted, then proposed a substitute motion that this issue not be brought up to the Board for a period of not less than 24 months. This passed unanimously. |
The University of Michigan's Board of Regents extended benefits to Domestic
Partners two years ago. In 1992 the U-M Board of Regents passed Bylaw
14.06, which prevented any form of discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation. The Regents then established a Task Force to make
recommendations on the implementation of Bylaw 14.06. In their report, the
Task Force affirmed preventing discrimination of any kind on the basis of
sexual orientation. In the very next paragraph, they recommended that
benefits NOT be extended to non-married heterosexual partners, but only to
non-married same-sex partners.
The MSU Lesbian-Bi-Gay Task Force decided to recommend that benefits be extended to all domestic partners, regardless of orientation, who had established themselves in a committed relationship for at least six months, were committed to each other's welfare, and had proof of jointly held property and bank accounts. Many felt that by limiting the proposal only to same-sex partners as U-M had done, they would be open to criticism that they were practicing discrimination in the name of non-discrimination. Also, the fact that only 84 same-sex partners had applied for benefits at U-M (out of 20,000 employees, 0.42% of the University's workforce), left them open to the criticism that this was legislation for only a tiny, special interest group. Many of Michigan State's Trustees expressed concern about the hidden costs associated with the more extensive proposed benefits. They also believed that they did not have the authority, as elected officials of a state institution, to make a decision that would in effect determine what constitutes a legal union. They felt this issue would be better left to the State Legislature. |
