The Milwaukee Public School Board's Finance Committee took a vote last evening concerning whether or not to support "equal provision of employee benefits regardless of an employee's sexual orientation or family status". The committee voted 4 to 1 in favor of that change in the MPS system.
Up to now, there are four school districts that provide similar benefit coverage. Those schools are in Madison, Middleton, Sun Prairie and La Crosse. Additionally, the City of Milwaukee and MATC provide domestic partner benefits. These kinds of changes have been made elsewhere around the country so this is not new although it is still unusual.
It is not possible to fully step away from the 'third rail' of whether or not same sex partners should or should not receive benefits from the employer of one of the partners. This subject evokes very strong feelings both pro and con. This is one of those classic 'slippery slope' issue sets where those desiring such benefits nibble away at the elephant a bite at a time, and someday we awaken to find the entire elephant has been eaten.
The language portrayed in the committee's proposition also suggests that this is not simply a subject about same sex couples. What is to prevent one MPS employee from cohabiting with a boyfriend or girlfriend whether or not there is an 'understanding' other than simple cohabitation for the time being? Will a 'marriage certificate' be required in order to qualify?
How can a marriage certificate be presented unless it was obtained in one of the brief windows that have periodically opened for a day or two around the country?
If not a marriage certificate, then just what documentation will be required? What would stop a person who has just been diagnosed with a very serious disease from applying for coverage through a friend employed by MPS or the City or MATC?
My recollection is that Jennifer Morales (the MPS board member who introduced this motion during a recent board meeting) and her partner traveled to Victoria, BC to be married. Will that certificate be acceptable in Milwaukee, or will the MPS benefits people simply need to take the employee's word for the establishment of a domestic partner?
The Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association immediately jumped on this and will expect this to be made available to bargaining unit employees prior to the expiration of the current contract. The slippery slope increases in angle rather quickly on occasion.
Is this a case of cart and horse in reverse? Should this issue have been resolved in courts of law prior to these small incursions in one location and then another? Or, is it the mood of the country that this is what should be available pure and simple?
The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple. Oscar Wilde
