Union denies benefits to gay couples

Boston Globe ^ | 5/11/04 | Donovan Slack

[kattracks]

A Boston labor union representing some 6,000 members has amended its benefit plans to exclude gay married couples from receiving health and pension benefits, evoking fear in some labor unions in Massachusetts that the move will set a dangerous precedent for other unions and employers throughout the state.

Anticipating the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts next week, trustees and administrators of the benefit plans of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 103 issued a clarification of the phrase "dependent spouse" to mean "a person of the opposite sex." The clarification was announced in a letter, a copy of which was obtained by the Globe, sent Friday to union members throughout Eastern Massachusetts.

"In light of all the changes that are coming, we just wanted to be ahead of the curve and make the clarification," administrator Russell F. Sheehan said in an interview yesterday.

[ken5050]

Guess this means that the DNC convention in Boston will use candles for light...

[17th Miss Regt]

They'll be using candles, but not for light.

[Always Right]

Hey, hey, hey, stop that....lol

[Sam the Sham]

Forcing normal union members to absorb the medical bills of the sodomite lifestyle will wreck any pension and benefits plan. This union was looking out for the interests of its members and there will be grass roots pressure in all unions to do likewise.

[HEY4QDEMS]

Thanks for the visual, no lunch for me today.

[kidd]

The Democrats are a loose coalition of different interest groups (labor, teachers, feminists, abortionists, homosexuals, minorities, socialists, environmentalists, etc).

Labor has always been the most "conservative" part of the democrats (pro-gun, pro-military, pro-religion). The homosexual agenda is incompatible with labor.

Minorities have also been moving away from the democrats. Many of the blacks that I know I truly insulted that homosexuals compare their issue with gay marriages to Civil Rights issues - and will outright reject the homosexual agenda.

Lines are being drawn, even on the left.

[ken5050]

PING!

[17th Miss Regt]

I'd love it if they would stop that, but they won't.

[ken5050]

Belated welcome to FR..you've got the coolest handle..WOOLEY BOOLEY!!!!

[prion]

Huh. Remember the time when it was a news story if a union did offer benefits to gay couples? Ah, those distant, happy days of...last year.

[EQAndyBuzz]

OK I need to understand this because my simple neocon mind has great diffulty when it comes to our esteemed party of the left.

1. Unions are Liberal
2. Gay marriage is a Liberal talking point
3. Every Liberal group hates Bush
4. The Union wants to exclude Gay couples from receiving
benefits
5. The ACLU hasn't stepped in yet to say this is
discrimination

Looks to me like the party of inclusion is practicing exclusion. The DU boards must be buzzing about this would never have happened if Gore was in office.

[speedy]

"evoking fear in some labor unions in Massachusetts that the move will set a dangerous precedent for other unions and employers throughout the state"

Dangerous precedent? How many gay electrician couples have been receiving these benefits up to now? These guys talk as if all along, gay couples have had their medical costs picked up, and now comes this radical change. How did the argument ever get framed this way in the first place?

PS -- I agree with ken5050 on the cool handle. Sam the Sham rules -- Lookin' For Ring-Dang-Du and Ju Ju Hand -- they don't write them like that anymore (and I'm not saying they should.....)

[The Old Hoosier]

Wedge issue bump!

[EdReform]

Ping

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues"

[Ciexyz]

The IBEW doesn't fool around.

[Ciexyz]

How does the AFL-CIO and the APWU (American Postal Workers Union) stand on this issue?

[olde north church]

What I want to know --
Where are 'White" churches reaching out to the "African-American" churches who find this behavior as abhorent.
My uncle, proud member of the IBEW, last vote cast for: Bush Sr. -- reason -- his favorite magazine was Bassmaster. Shallow, uninspired, and informed as he needed to be. He got the connection as to who was the "real man of the people"
43 courted the wrong unions.

[biblewonk]

The Democratic party is a bunch of strange bedfellows and I do mean bedfellows.

[blanknoone]

The D party has been in transition from a coherent political philosophy to a collection of special interests since WWII. The question is, will it hold together, and if so, for how long?

Unions having to pick up the dramatically increased medical costs associated with homosexuality. Religious african-Americans wanting the vouchers the education establishment vehemently opposes. Etc. etc. &c. Can the D's survive their internal contradictions?