You asked whether municipalities can limit domestic partner benefits to same-sex couples and if Connecticut or Massachusetts has statutes or regulations addressing this issue.

The Office of Legislative Research cannot issue legal opinions and this report should not be considered such.

Municipalities, like all employers, decide what benefits, if any, to offer their employees. When they purchase this coverage from an insurer or health maintenance organization, the eligibility requirements they have agreed on are specifically stated in the policy. For municipalities, coverage decisions are usually set by ordinance, collective bargaining agreement, or both. One rationale for limiting coverage to same-sex couples is to keep costs down; another is that opposite-sex domestic partners can obtain coverage by getting married, but same-sex couples cannot.

The overwhelming number of employers that offer domestic partner health coverage – 92% of the 7,149 employers tracked by the Human Rights Campaign’s WorkNet – offer it to both same-sex and opposite-sex partners. This is partly because of local ordinances that require equal treatment for both groups. But 63% of those who are not required to offer coverage to both groups do so anyway.

Neither Connecticut nor Massachusetts has state laws or regulations covering this issue. But Massachusetts employers must offer married same-sex couples the same benefits that they offer married heterosexual couples.

SP: ro