Newsfeed
Printer-Friendly ModeFaculty benefits remain
SVSU to continue giving domestic partner benefits
January 31, 2005 —
The furor that was and surrounds the recently passed Proposal 2 is beginning to have an effect on Saginaw Valley State University's campus. With the potential existing for the domestic partners' benefits to be eliminated by the passage of this constitutional amendment, several SVSU faculty members are in danger of losing these benefits.
Current Benefits
Currently, both married employees and those living in a domestic partnership receive equable benefits from the University. The major difference between the two is that employees have to pay taxes on the domestic partnership benefits, while married employees do not have to pay taxes on the insurance.
According to Sean Kosofsky of the Triangle Foundation, a Michigan organization serving the state's gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and allied communities, SVSU was one of the last state-supported universities to grant domestic partnership benefits. However, the only state university that still does not offer domestic partnership benefits is Grand Valley State University.
Contrary to what some may believe, Mr. Kosofsky said that Governor Granholm's decision to pull domestic partner benefits from the bargaining table with some unions (including the UAW) will have no effect on SVSU employees. However, he did say that opponents of domestic partner benefits, including the Thomas More Law Center, a conservative Christian rights group, might sue certain universities to force them to remove domestic partner benefits under Proposal 2.
While Michigan, like most states, does not offer domestic partner benefits to its employees, other states do. Solely concentrated in the socially progressive West and Northeast, eleven states and the District of Columbia currently offer domestic partner benefits. This includes both the nation's most populous state (California) and the nation's smallest state (Rhode Island).
SVSU's Position
There are no current plans to change benefits for SVSU employees as of right now.
"The University has been advised by its legal counsel that there is no reason to change its position on the manner until there has been some definitive ruling by the Courts," says Dr. Carlos Ramet, executive assistant to the president.
In a sort of suspended animation, these benefits are not going to be removed from SVSU employees anytime soon, lest a major legal battle face them.
These benefits are currently part of the faculty's union contract, and to remove them immediately without a court order would be illegal.
Area Climate
The issue has been raised that perhaps the Tri Cities' environment is not the most conducive to the support of domestic partnership benefits, and on a larger scale, gay rights.
There is some evidence for this, for if the city of Saginaw is discounted, the Tri-Cities area is solidly Republican, according to the 2004 election results.
Republicans are generally seen as being less supportive of gay rights and domestic partner benefits than Democrats.
Some SVSU faculty share this view of the area in which they teach. Dr. Lucy Mercier, assistant professor of Social Work, is one of the faculty members who are receiving domestic partner benefits from the University.
She believes that the surrounding areas make it difficult for an openly homosexual person to feel comfortable, so some gay individuals are hesitant in coming out.
Dr. Mercier also believes that the University does not like people in the community to be cognizant of the domestic partnership benefits it currently grants. If the community were made fully aware that SVSU grants these benefits, she says, there would be significant backlash from many of the area's residents.
On the other hand, she points out that a socially restrictive community makes it less appealing to potential faculty, and could retard the University's long-term growth. Nonetheless, she is less than positive that the benefits will exist on a long term, permanent basis.
While domestic partnership benefits will likely be part of the faculty's package for the short-term, there is much angst among many that these benefits earned only recently will be only brief. Regardless of whether the benefits will be taken away, it has spurred valuable discussion about the tolerance of the University, the general community, and the direction in which both are headed.