Couple Says Health Coverage Dropped for not Being
Gay
March 31, 2009 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - A heterosexual
couple in Washington State is challenging an employer's
decision to drop health care coverage for the female, saying
it is reverse discrimination.
The Yakima Herald reports that Sharleen Honeycutt
and Charles Weems have filed a complaint with the state
Human Rights Commission and the federal Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission against Battelle, Weems' employer,
for terminating medical coverage to Honeycutt because the
couple is not gay.
Battelle spokesperson Staci West says the company
denies violating any federal or state law, and it only
extends medical benefits to same-sex domestic partners
because they "have no other legal way to obtain health
care benefits," according to the Herald.
Weems, 63, and Honeycutt, 70, met in 2003 and Weems
moved into Honeycutt's home the next year. According to
the news report, they thought about getting married but
Honeycutt would have lost her monthly Social Security
payment from her late husband, who died in 1997.
They discussed the dilemma with Battelle, and claim
Battelle officials agreed to extend medical benefits to
Honeycutt as long as the couple registered as domestic
partners with the city of Olympia, which they did.
In 2007, the state Legislature created domestic
partnership laws, granting same-sex couples some of the
legal benefits of marriage, and also extended the same
option to opposite-sex couples over the age of 62,
specifically to let them avoid the loss in Social
Security payments.
Since then, more than 5,000 couples have registered
with the state, but Weems and Honeycutt never did because
they were receiving medical benefits at that time and
felt there was no reason to.
In late 2007, the company warned its employees that
different-sex partners would stop receiving medical
benefits on December 31, 2008. West told the Herald it
was "a business decision that weighed several factors,
including how it impacted our ability to offer benefits
overall to our staff. And so we chose to offer that
benefit only to same-sex registered domestic
partners."
In their complaint, Weems and Honeycutt seek
reinstatement of the benefits for Honeycutt and an
unspecified amount of punitive damages.
Rebecca Moore
editors@plansponsor.com