College of Business Administration

Article Reprints:

Morton, Joseph

Some officers had moral concerns about same-sex benefits Omaha World Herald, April 16th, 2004

Omaha World Herald (Nebraska)

April 16, 2004, Friday SUNRISE EDITION

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 3b;

LENGTH: 569 words

HEADLINE: Some officers had moral concerns about same-sex benefits

BYLINE: By Joseph Morton

SOURCE: WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER

BODY:

    Concern from police officers was one reason that the Omaha police union gave Thursday for dropping its demand for some benefits for its members in same-sex relationships.

    The explanation marked the first time that the union officially commented on the controversial part of its proposed new labor contract with the city in the nearly two weeks since the provisions regarding gay officers' use of paid time off became public.

    The union also cited concerns of City Council members and pending legal issues over domestic partnerships as reasons. The union also said the benefits have become a source of public controversy.

    "The Omaha police union negotiating team has withdrawn its request for domestic partner benefits, since it is apparent that the controversy has overshadowed the importance of the overall contract and its savings to the city, " the union said in a press release.

    The limited benefits for gay police officers in the proposed contract were requested by union negotiators and agreed to by Mayor Mike Fahey. Union members are scheduled to vote on the contract throughout next week.

    The benefits would recognize police officers' same-sex domestic partners and their relatives, allowing officers to use their time off to care for those family members if they became sick or to attend their funerals.

    Supporters say that the benefits would not cost the city any additional money and that officers with same-sex partners deserve them.

    Sgt. Michele Bang, a 10-year Omaha police veteran who lives with her longtime female domestic partner, criticized union negotiators for not having the "moral courage" to stick with their position.

    Union officials would not comment Thursday on why police officers are concerned about the benefits, but Officer Virgil Patlan said the Omaha Police Department is "a pretty conservative department."

    He said he and many other officers oppose the benefits and would not approve a contract that included them.

    "It's a moral issue - we would be recognizing the lifestyle," Patlan said. "They're already getting equal pay, and we get the same benefits. It's just that there is a recognized order that marriage is between a man and a woman."

    Critics of same-sex benefits for Omaha city employees welcomed the news that the union was dropping its pursuit of the benefits.

    Supporters of the proposal for limited benefits, meanwhile, said the move is a slap in the face for gay and lesbian officers who want the same benefits their married colleagues receive.

    Fahey has said he will not discuss the contract until it is finalized.

    The City Council, which must approve the contract, has been divided on the benefits.

    Councilman Chuck Sigerson, who opposes the benefits for financial, legal and moral reasons, had asked the union to remove the benefits for gay officers from the proposed contract.

    "I'm not sure if it was my request or a lot of people's requests, but the bottom line is - it was the result we wanted," Sigerson said.

    Councilman Marc Kraft, who supports the benefits, said union leaders' dropping of the issue was worse than if they had never included them in the contract. The issue is going to surface again and again, he said.

    "It's an issue whose time has come, and it's the right thing to do," Kraft said.

    He said the council might investigate whether it can address the issue with an ordinance.

Return to Professor Dunn's home page.