The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

Significant benefits

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:

A security fee-for-all (December 11, 2007)
Farewell, Chancellor (December 10, 2007)
$$FC (December 6, 2007)
In a bind (December 5, 2007)
Entitlement Town (December 4, 2007)

by Badger Herald Editorial Board

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Two days ago, La Crosse County joined a small contingency of Wisconsin localities, including Dane County, that provide full domestic partner benefits to its employees. To achieve this, the La Crosse County Board brokered a deal with county union officials who agreed to take a reduced pay raise in exchange for the benefits, which, in turn, will save taxpayer dollars.

We hope this trend continues through the state until all government employees are provided with domestic partner benefits. Perhaps if enough counties ratify domestic partner benefits for their employees, it will send a clear message to the state Legislature and inspire them to address the issue in the current legislative session.

While Wisconsin statutes disallow domestic partner benefits for state employees — including the University of Wisconsin System — it is time for a change. UW is currently the only school in the Big Ten that doesn't provide these benefits, a glaring detriment to the university's ability to recruit and retain quality faculty and staff. The UW System has seen numerous prominent faculty members leave the state on account of this disparity. Until the state extends these benefits, we are bound to lose more to private and out-of-state universities.

What's more, the state restrictions don't stop there. Because the city of Madison buys into the state health insurance program, it is not able to provide traditional domestic partner benefits to city employees either. Instead, the city relies on a scheme that reimburses city employees who have domestic partners and purchase family insurance through the city's insurance plan. Though it is true to Madison's progressive roots, the pseudo-domestic partner benefits plan is inconvenient for employees and does not cover domestic partners after a city employee retires. To split off from the state plan and purchase its own insurance would cost the city more than it currently pays for its reimbursement plan.

And though arguments against such benefits exist — for example, employees taking advantage of the system and claiming friends as domestic partners — the La Crosse plan requires that employees sign affidavits and show credible proof of partnership.

It is time the state of Wisconsin and its counties and municipalities recognize the needs of constituents and extend domestic partner benefits to their employees.

Add a comment

We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.