Sunday, January 29, 2006

Another solution to the world's problems (Humility remix)

Sometimes I get it in my head that I am the solution to all the world's problems. This is one of those times:

I was listening to talk radio the other day as the radio host discussed the problems facing companies trying to offer health care benefits to "life partners". More and more companies have found that public pressure, the desire to be competitive, or the felt obligation to support employees of alternative lifestyles compels them to offer health care packages to life partners. This is a sticky situation for companies because it is very difficult to prove or disprove that two people are "life partners". For example, I am a male and I have a male roommate. If I were unemployed, what would stop me from claiming to be in a gay relationship with my roommate to get a huge discount on health insurance. Well, there are a variety of reasons that would stop ME, but they wouldn't stop everybody from committing insurance fraud. The radio host brought up an interesting example from the University of Florida. Basically, the U of F requires domestic partners to prove they have joint financial responsibilities (some assets under both names), and they must sign a guarantee that basically says they are having sex.

Our culture is going down the crapper.

Let's forget about life partners for a second. Why do companies extend health care benefits to spouses in the first place? Answer, to be competitive in the job market. If you want the best people for the job you have to offer the best salary and the best benefits packages. Why would someone need their spouse's benefits? Two reasons: 1) to get them through temporary periods of unemployment, and the all-time most obvious reason: 2) to allow the employee's spouse to stay home and take care of their children.

DUH!

If you don't have children (and you don't need short term health care because you are temporarily unemployed) why do you need your spouse's health care? Why should a company extend health care to people just because they happen to be having sex with their employees? That doesn't make any frickin' sense. How do you prove that two people are or are not having sex? It's darn near impossible.

Here is my solution to this dilemma. If I were a progressive employer that wanted to offer health care benefits to "non-traditional families" (read "people with illegitimate children and homosexuals with adopted kids"), these are the conditions that they would have to meet:
1) They live together (gay or straight, it doesn't matter)
2) They have children together (biological or adopted)
3) One of the responsible parties does not have a job with health care benefits.

Here's a little business management lesson. If you have a policy, you have to be able to monitor the policy, and you have to be able to enforce the policy, otherwise it's a waste of company paperwork. Offering health care benefits to "life partners" is impossible to monitor and enforce. The three aforementioned regulations are very easy to monitor and very easy to enforce.

Problem: Solved.

7 comments:

J.T. - said...

My solution would probably be not to offer benefits to "non-traditional" families. We are giving the gay agenda way too much credence when we completely rearrange our company's healtchare benefits thinking that somehow 1% of the population will completely dismantle our company and we will no longer be competitive.

The General said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Oneway the Herald said...

Great subject to tackle, General. It makes sense for a business to consider policy based on enforceability.

Teef raises a point that is difficult to take in, considering the "Real World" always has at least one homosexual in its cast. But I will go with Teef here; the number of non-heteros is inflated.

It would tough to navigate this culture as a business owner.

pepperdeaf said...

i am thankful for the remix.

i was going to comment on your language, but am grateful that the big HP did the job for me.

Oneway the Herald said...

big HP?

The General displayed some prudence in his remix, while still making his point. All of the callousing euphemisms floating around can drive a man crazy.

pepperdeaf said...

>>big HP?<<

holy spirit.

Oneway the Herald said...

All you MDiv's with your Greek are all the same.