Rant and qotd

EratMama · September 2012

HOW DO YOU FeEL ABOUT DOMESTIC PARtNER BENEFITS, SUCH As INSURANCE BENEFITS, BEING OFfErED TO OPpOSITE SEX UNMARRIED COUPLES ? L'S WORK IS OFfERING DP BENEFITS (YAY!) . MARRIED COUPLES JUST CHECK A BOX. WE NEED 4 PIECES OF PAPERWORK, THEN L HAs TO GO ON HER LUNCHBREAK TO HR, I NEED TO MEET HEr, WITH THE BABY, HAVE FORMS NOTARIZED THErE (BECAUSE NOTARY AT THE BANK ISNT GOID ENOUGH?), & THEN PAY TAXES ON THE DIFfEReNCE. TO ADD INSULT TO INJuRY, ONE OF THE OPTIONS FOR PAPERWORK IS A BIRTH CErTIFICATE STATING WE ARE BOTH PARENTS OF THE SaME KiD....SOMETHING NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE In THIS STATE

2brides · September 2012

Our process is the same as MM. And this year all married couples had to prove their marriage this year (you should have heard the complaints from my heterosexual co-workers who had to dig up marriage licenses!)

We aren't on each other's insurance since we both can get it through work and we don't want to have to pay extra taxes on it (but thankful, it is there if we needed it.)

2mommiesinoh · September 2012

My work offers DP benefits. I did not cover A but if I did all we would have had to do was sign a DP affadavit. This year they did make everyone verify their dependants and that was going to be a PITA if I had to. I called and my Canadian marriage certificate was not good enough BUT if we were straight it clearly stated a foreign jurisdiction marriage license sufficed. I actually had a complain in with our HR department about that clause. I would have had to register our domestic partnership with a city that allowed out of resident registrations as our city did not allow them until jsut a few months ago. Still easier than you though.

JGY · September 2012

Same thing here with ALL employees having to verify their dependants this year. I AM covered on S's health insurance, as her coverage is SO much better than what is offered through my work. Of course we, like every other same-sex couple, have to pay federal taxes on the amount that her employer contributes to my premium. And that definitely is a tough pill to swallow come tax time, but we've decided that the coverage benefits and cost outweigh that tax penalty for us.

I may switch back to the insurance offered by my employer after the LO is born.

I do think it's complete BS that you have to go in to her HR Dept. Her, I understand. You? Ridic.

I generally try to have patience with all of the BS associated with this mess (patience, NOT acceptance). All change is a process and while I will be vocal about the things that I think are unfair or unnecessary, I try to keep it in perspective and remind myself that I am grateful to be able to take advantage of something that so many people before me (and I) fought for. Then I go home and curse a blue streak. Wink

2moms2b · September 2012

When I carried M on insurance, the only thing we had to provide was a notarized affidavit of domestic partnership along with proof that we live together. I was able to show our hud statements for our house as we own it together. I just turned those into my HR. They sent them into the insurance company for me.

My company now offers this but we chose not to cover M (even though she is uninsured). The package my company chooses that offers this would triple my insurance costs taking half of my paycheck to cover her due to additional taxes etc that are taken. It's not like that with a hetero couple so I don't quite understand it, only that it would be almost $700 per check to cover us both!

She is currently looking for a new job that offers benefits so she can carry all of us and I can go back to school.

Kershnic · September 2012

NY now has marriage equality, but before that passed both of our works offered DP coverage. I think it was a simple form plus I believe one proof we used a joint bank account. But we each have separate insurance through our respective works due to the tax issue. When we have a baby and I quit to go to school we'll probably have to take the tax hit to be on hers.

I have no problems with unmarried straight couples getting access to the same benefits. It's health insurance. People should have access to it. Sure, it's stupid that they have to do that to be 'fair' instead of acknowledging our marriages to be fair, but the bottom line is more people get health insurance.

JGY · September 2012

Kershnic:
I have no problems with unmarried straight couples getting access to the same benefits. It's health insurance. People should have access to it. Sure, it's stupid that they have to do that to be 'fair' instead of acknowledging our marriages to be fair, but the bottom line is more people get health insurance.

I forgot about this part of the original post/question. This is exactly how I feel about it as well.

ball.and.chain · September 2012

Kershnic:
I have no problems with unmarried straight couples getting access to the same benefits. It's health insurance. People should have access to it. Sure, it's stupid that they have to do that to be 'fair' instead of acknowledging our marriages to be fair, but the bottom line is more people get health insurance.

This. In my mind, the issue is that we don't have nationwide marriage equality, so many of us are forced to choose DP benefits when they are offered over married-couple benefits. It's wrong from a marraige equality standpoint, but not from an insurance standpoint. As long as that's the situation, it doesn't seem unreasonable that straight couples have the same option.

I have no personal experience with this though because we each are on health insurance through our respective employers. Aside from the tax issue, this is because the cost of a 2-person plan through my employer is more than twice the cost of a single employee plan. That's the same regardless of marriage status or the sex of the people involved. We'll likely put everyone on my plan when there's a baby in the picture, since a family plan is more cost-effective than a 2-person plan and my plan is much better than my wife's. I'm hoping my firm will offer gross-up benefits by then, or else DOMA will be off the table and the tax issue won't apply.

EratMama · September 2012

First of all, sorry about that horrendous formatting on my phone! Yikes!

I am not sure if it is rational, but I have a problem with straight couples getting DP benefits, when they could just get married. It seems like a cop-out. I worked for one company that required any couple to obtain "the highest form of recognition available in their area." I thought that was reasonable.

Want a personalized experience?

Rant and qotd

Re: Rant and qotd

Choose Another Board

Search Boards