Gay partners seek college benefits

Thursday, Feb. 18, 1999 | 11:13 a.m.

Should homosexual partners who have a domestic relationship with an employee of Nevada's university and college system be included in a benefits package traditionally reserved for married heterosexuals?

That question will be discussed at length when the Community College of Southern Nevada's Faculty Senate holds its monthly meeting Friday at the college's Cheyenne Campus.

The answer to the question could have far-reaching implications for the state of Nevada, where most public and private employers believe the answer is no.

At Friday's meeting, scheduled for 1 p.m., philosophy professor Geoffrey Frasz will ask the faculty representatives to support a proposal that would call for a policy change allowing "domestic partners" of employees of the University and Community College System of Nevada to be eligible for such benefits as medical and life insurance.

The proposal was written by the Human Rights Task Force of the college's Campus Environment Committee to raise awareness about discrimination against homosexuals, but unmarried heterosexuals who have live-in relations also could benefit.

Though UNLV hasn't addressed a domestic partners benefits package, earlier this week President Carol Harter and her cabinet added "sexual orientation" to the campus' non-discriminatory policy.

"It should take effect Monday," said Ann Casados-Mueller, director of UNLV's Diversity Initiatives. "The president has decided this is the right thing to do, that all persons on campus should have the same rights, employees and students."

Three of the state's seven campuses now have sexual-orientation statements: UNLV, the University of Nevada, Reno, and Desert Research Institute.

The Community College of Southern Nevada does not have a non-discriminiation policy on sexual orientation, which advocates in the gay and lesbian community say must come first.

"We need to lift the veil of fear before we can have the freedom to take advantage of benefits," says Reva Anderson, executive director of the Gay and Lesbian Community Center of Nevada.

The problem, Anderson said, is many gay people fear if they took advantage of the benefits they would be "outed" and their jobs could be in jeopardy.

"Domestic benefits are good, but we would rather have job security," Anderson said.

"There is no job security for gays and lesbians in Nevada," she said. "We're more concerned about being able to work without losing our jobs. When you talk gay and lesbian benefits, you would have to admit to being gay and lesbian, which is not a safe thing to do in Clark County or in Las Vegas."

Anderson said some of the larger, national organizations, such as Levi Strauss and Apple Computers, provide benefits for domestic partners. But in Nevada, such packages are rare.

"Generally, our position is we feel we are entitled to the benefits of our working partners," Anderson said. "At first, there was a fear it would increase the cost of benefits to the organization, but research has shown that that is not necessarily the case."

Anderson said health benefits are not the only issue.

"In some corporate situations, if a partner is moved by the corporation, with heterosexual couples the cost of moving the partner is included in the expenses," Anderson said. "We would like to see that sort of benefit as well."

These and other similar issues may surface during discussion Friday after Frasz introduces a resolution at the Faculty Senate meeting that states the group supports efforts "to prepare a domestic partnership policy and to promote such a policy throughout the UCCSN system."

If the resolution passes this month and is affirmed next month, Faculty Senate President Al Balboni said, "that only starts the ball rolling."

"It would have to receive broad support throughout CCSN, the Nevada Faculty Alliance, the regents. It would be, to my mind, an extremely lengthy process."

It also would have to gain approval from the state government, which provides the benefit package for all state employees, including those who work for the university and college system.

The State Committee on Benefits, which is dealing with a shortfall in state revenue this year, would have to approve the change in benefits.

Joanne Vuillemot, who is on the Faculty Senate's Salary and Benefits Committee, says the cost would be negligible.

While health insurance is provided for the employee, the employee must pay for dependents.

The grants and aids benefits, which allows spouses to take classes at the school, might cost the college, she said, "But we don't think it would be significant."

Other university systems that offer such benefits have noted a cost increase of 2 to 4 percent, said Linda Foreman, a sociology professor in the Department of Human Behavior.

"The cost to the institution is negligible," said Foreman, who also is chairwoman of the Human Rights Task Force, which pushed the proposal.

Foreman is chairman of the 10-member task force, which has two openly gay members, and is the one who raised the issue after Matthew Shepard, a gay student at the University of Wyoming, was brutally murdered near Laramie last October.

"I was driven by the Matthew Shepherd incident," Foreman said. "That was the passion that goaded me, realizing that a man could be killed for being gay."

She said people are afraid for their careers.

"We live in a don't ask, don't tell environment," she said.

Foreman said she has taken the lead in the controversial issue because she has tenure and it is easier for her to be outspoken than a younger person.

While the policy, if passed, would also benefit heterosexuals, she said, heterosexuals have an obvious advantage over homosexuals.

"Heterosexuals have the option to marry. Gays do not," she said.

Foreman said the policy proposal, or proposals, would be presented to the Campus Environment Committee, which reports to the regents annually -- "probably early in the fall semester."

She knows achieving equity may be a long process, and that it might require changes not only in the higher education community but the Legislature as well.

"We will try and develop a policy and move it through the system," said Foreman, calling these initial actions "baby steps."

Regent Howard Rosenberg, chairman of the regents' Campus Environment Committee -- which is not affiliated with similar committees that exist on each campus -- welcomes the discussion of benefits for domestic partners.

"That's what a university does -- promote discussion of controversial issues," Rosenberg said.