Conflicting Signals on Same-Sex Marriage Affect Employee Benefit Plans
11/14/2008Just one week after California voters approved an amendment (Proposition 8) to the California state constitution to ban same-sex marriages (possibly calling into question all same-sex marriages performed earlier in 2008), same-sex marriages are now proceeding in the State of Connecticut. The Connecticut development will force more employers to address how their plans treat same-sex spouses because many large companies have offices in New York, and employees in those offices may reside in Connecticut. Further, given the geographic proximity of Connecticut to New York, the fact that Connecticut does not have a residency requirement to be married in Connecticut and the fact that the New York attorney general has opined that New York will recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, employees residing in New York may go to Connecticut to marry a same-sex spouse, have that marriage recognized in New York and then request spousal benefits under their employer’s plan.
For the issues employers should consider when deciding how to administer their employee benefit plans with respect to same-sex spouses, see McDermott’s On the Subject “California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling: Employee Benefit Plan Implications.”
