Partners or Pets?

Pam* alerts us to this interesting story about the Palm Beach Community College, which has apparently just decided to offer its employees the option of buying health insurance for their pets, having just this past August declined to offer employees the option of buying health insurance for their partners.

Here is an excerpt from a release she quoted from the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council:

Last August, two members of the Board of Trustees of Palm Beach Community College killed a proposal which would have granted the college's full-time employees the ability to purchase health insurance for their domestic partners.

But soon, the college's employees will be able to purchase health insurance for their pets.

On November 16, Dr. Ellen Grace, PBCC's Director of Human Relations notified the college's full-time employees that "the college has added pet insurance as an available option to employees through payroll deduction."

"When it comes to providing health PBCHRC Logoinsurance, Palm Beach Community College prefers puppies to partners," said Rand Hoch, President of the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council.

The Council, a local nonprofit civil rights organization, has been encouraging the college to provide domestic partnership benefits since 2005.

"While many pet owners consider their dogs and cats part of their families, there is a basic disconnect when an employer will insure an employee's pet but not an employee's partner," said Deidre Newton, a PBCC graduate who serves as Vice President of the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council.

"The college's offer to insure pets within months of denying insurance for domestic partners is unbelievably insensitive," said Hoch.

"Last summer's decision not to offer domestic partner health insurance is irrational, since the college does not have to pay any portion of health insurance premium to insure an employee's partner," said Newton.

There's more at the link in the note.
———-
* Pam Spaulding, "Palm Beach Community College: insurance for pets, but not partners", Pam's House Blend, 22 November 2007.

Posted on November 22, 2007 at 21.54 by jns · Permalink
In: All, Faaabulosity, Laughing Matters

One Response

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by rightsaidfred
    on Friday, 23 November 2007 at 05.57
    Permalink

    –…since the college does not have to pay any portion of health insurance premium to insure an employee's partner,"–

    Yes and no. If partners come with a higher insurance risk, the premium for the college's pool might rise, thus this might mean the college is voting in a pay cut for employees.

    The pet insurance is a stand alone program. If someone brings in a high risk pet, only the participating employees are affected.

    I suppose the college could put domestic partners in a stand alone program.

    This quote might be relevant:

    –Hoch requested that "the issue of domestic partner benefits, including, but not limited to health insurance, continuation of health insurance coverage and family medical leave, be brought before the Trustees at the January 15, 2008 meeting."–

    Continuation of health insurance coverage could be seen as a subsidy, depending.

    Family medical leave sounds like an increased cost.

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply

To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.

I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.