Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am sure roommates would like equal tretment too if it comes to that.Some would alos like benfits for their pets as they see them as their depednents.
On another note many companies are limiting spousal benefits due to rising costs.
Right, because now they have to actually treat same-sex couples equally. They had no problem giving heterosexual couples and heterosexual singles benefits. But when homosexuality comes into play, then the "rising costs" argument comes to fore.
Good for Boeing, but since WA has legalized this abomination a case could be made for this action violating the Equal Prot Clause.
On another note many companies are limiting spousal benefits due to rising costs.
That seems to be what is going on here.
Boeing didn't release a formal statement of intent to discriminate. This "news" was released by a negotiator frm the employee's union, trying to put the ol' squeeze play on the company. And it looks like it is working.
Boeing obviously wants to minimise labor costs, but not at the expense of being on the wrong side of a human rights issue.
Ethics aside, It is hard to imagine that extending spousal benefits to married gays might actually add a lot to Boeing's bottom line. Certainly not enough to justify the resulting s$&t storm.
Boeing has already released a statement backtracking from the position taken by their negotiator. I predict the company will have to retreat on this one.
So you think it's okay that straight employees are treated differently (better) than gay employees?
How are they treated differently? Who gave gays the right to determine how marriage will be re-defined away from the one-man-one-woman rule which has been in place since society began? Why can't I be part of the definition team and decide that my PC will now be an equal partner in a 6-way marriage which also includes my espresso machine, my Mercedes, my female wife, and my copy of Windows. What makes their re-definition more valid than mine?
One-man-one-woman is the rule the rest of us go by. No one is asking them to do anything different.
Calling my dog a cat doesn't make him one. Calling your boyfriend your wife doesn't make him one either.
How are they treated differently? Who gave gays the right to determine how marriage will be re-defined away from the one-man-one-woman rule which has been in place since society began? Why can't I be part of the definition team and decide that my PC will now be an equal partner in a 6-way marriage which also includes my espresso machine, my Mercedes, my female wife, and my copy of Windows. What makes their re-definition more valid than mine?
One-man-one-woman is the rule the rest of us go by. No one is asking them to do anything different.
Calling my dog a cat doesn't make him one. Calling your boyfriend your wife doesn't make him one either.
Try those 'arguments' in a court of law and see how fast the judge calls the men in white coats....
I think this is more about being cheap than discrimination. Boeing was a comparatively progressive company regarding gay employees. I don't think it'll hold. They'll get a lot of heat and change their mind. It's untenable to be anti-gay with high-tech jobs/engineers in Seattle.
Seems like Boeing is trying to be sneaky, saying in negotiations that they won't extend benefits and then when that info goes public, they say that they don't discriminate and are offended at the suggestion - but they can't give a straight answer to whether they denied those benefits or not.
Clearly those Boeing folks are snakes. Putting on one face in negotiations and another in public. Sneaky snakes. People see right through their garbage. I don't know who they think they're fooling.
I can tell you.... First hand Boeing is one of the most equal rights open to diversity company I have ever seen. To think they are against gay marriage is insane. If anything they are just trying to keep the costs of benefits. Heaped. The union is exploding on this to get the upper hand on negotiating.
Why not. Are boyfriend /girl friend living togather not treated differently. Are not man and wife with no child taxed for benefit of people having chilcren. We have many laws that benefit those who can have children for the childs benefit because the nation belives in it. Man and man or woman and women are no different than girlfrend /boy firend in not having the same rights. Its not rights it's what they nation want to invest in for the future.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
