Oh Google your so silly..

[SteamWake]

Google announces 'gay only' benifits


A new Google policy is raising some eyebrows after the company revealed it will be compensating employees for taxes paid on domestic partners' health benefits – but only if they’re gay.


http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/01/google-raises-eyebrows-new-gay-employee-benefit/?test=latestnews

[Jimbuna]

But under Google's new policy, the company isn't offering any extra pay to heterosexual domestic partners, because it says heterosexual employees have the option of avoiding the tax by getting married.


That's a bit tough on those who are happy simply living together :doh:

[conus00]

They should change their banner:
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk234/conus00/Untitled-2.jpg

[SteamWake]

They should change their banner:
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk234/conus00/Untitled-2.jpg

LOL priceless !!

[Platapus]

It is similar to the policies in my company.

Unmarried heterosexual couples get very limited benefits
Unmarried homosexual couples get domestic partnership benefits

Why? Heterosexual couples have the legal option of getting married while homosexual couples do not.

I don't like that policy, but I think it is a common policy in companies.

[AVGWarhawk]

That's a bit tough on those who are happy simply living together :doh:

It some how discriminates. I see a reverse trend here. :hmmm:

[mookiemookie]

It some how discriminates. I see a reverse trend here. :hmmm:

It does not discriminate:

On average, employees with domestic partners will pay about $1,069 more a year in taxes than a married employee with the same coverage, according to a 2007 report by M. V. Lee Badgett, director of the Williams Institute, a research group that studies sexual orientation policy issues.

So Google is essentially going to cover those costs, putting same-sex couples on an even footing with heterosexual employees whose spouses and families receive health benefits.

That's not discrimination at all. They're not getting anything above and beyond what any other married couple is getting. They're having their costs reimbursed, putting them on equal footing with everyone else.

[FIREWALL]

It does not discriminate:



That's not discrimination at all. They're not getting anything above and beyond what any other married couple is getting. They're having their costs reimbursed, putting them on equal footing with everyone else.


Is your employer compensateing you ? :p2:

[UnderseaLcpl]

That's not discrimination at all. They're not getting anything above and beyond what any other married couple is getting. They're having their costs reimbursed, putting them on equal footing with everyone else.

And by a considerate and conscious private employer, no less:DL
Way to go, google!

[Jimbuna]

It some how discriminates. I see a reverse trend here. :hmmm:

Good point....a kind of reverse discrimination :hmmm:

Is your employer compensateing you ? :p2:

LOL :DL

[AVGWarhawk]

It does not discriminate:



That's not discrimination at all. They're not getting anything above and beyond what any other married couple is getting. They're having their costs reimbursed, putting them on equal footing with everyone else.


Really? Is says there is no compensation for heterosexual couples. :hmmm: Or as Jim put it...simply like living together. What part does this not make this a reversal of discrimination? :hmmm:

[mookiemookie]

Really? Is says there is no compensation for heterosexual couples. :hmmm: Or as Jim put it...simply like living together. What part does this not make this a reversal of discrimination? :hmmm:

Why would heterosexual couples deserve the compensation AND the tax break? And the living together argument goes out the window because gay couples don't have the option of getting married, even if they wanted to. Heterosexual couples do.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Why would heterosexual couples deserve the compensation AND the tax break? And the living together argument goes out the window because gay couples don't have the option of getting married, even if they wanted to. Heterosexual couples do.

Precisely. I applaud google for taking this proactive step, even though gay guys totally wierd me out, and gay women seem to hijack google's search engines on a regular basis. I don't know how it happens, honest.:DL

Personally, I wouldn't give tax breaks to anyone simply because they have a religious or contractual civil partnership of any kind. I'd base taxation on a flat rate for every individual with a cutoff point for people making below a certain amount.