The EmpLAWyerologist Firm

The Employer's Legal Wellness Professional

  • Home
  • About
    • About Janette Levey Frisch
    • How Can A Employer’s Legal Wellness Professional Help?
  • Our Services
    • Consulting
    • Investigations
    • Training
    • Keynote Speaking
    • Employment Practices Wellness Check-Up
  • Webinars & Seminars
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Schedule Your Free Consultation Today
You are here: Home / Employee Benefits / SCOTUS’ Gay Marriage Ruling and Its Impact on Employee Benefits

SCOTUS’ Gay Marriage Ruling and Its Impact on Employee Benefits

July 9, 2015 by theemplawyerologist 7 Comments

Gay MarriageJune 26, 2015. From that day on, same-sex marriage has and will have the same recognition and protection as marriage between opposite-sex partners. While not an employment law case, it does have tremendous implications for employers. So we here at The EmpLAWyerologist are going to take a good look. This week we will look specifically at the impact on employee benefits plans. Ready to get started? Join The EmpLAWyerologist after the jump…

I am not going to discuss the reasoning behind the actual ruling. There are plenty of other articles or posts you can read if you want that information. You can also find the actual opinion here. I will, however, give you the actual name of the case — Obergefell et al v Hodges. OK, I digress. The ruling re-defines “marriage” and that definition impacts a few key areas of concern to employers, particularly benefit plans.

Most employer-sponsored benefit plans making at least some benefits available to an employee’s spouse. Some of you may be thinking that Obergefell is not such a big change, because the US Supreme Court already recognized same-sex marriages in US v. Windsor. (Click here if you want to read that opinion.) That is only partially true. US v. Windsor. recognized same-sex spouses for federal tax purposes and in the context of the federal government’s regulation of benefit plans. In other words, US v Windsor only impacted rights arising out of federal law. It did not require state taxing authorities, insurance departments or domestic courts to recognize same-sex marriages. Whichever side of the legal/constitutional argument you might be on, US v Windsor created a lot of confusion for a lot of employers.

The good news is that Obergefell goes a long way toward providing employers much-needed clarity:  Same-sex spouses are entitled to the same treatment as opposite-sex spouses. Therefore, if up until now you have offered benefits to opposite-sex spouses or have allowed employees to designate opposite-sex spouses as beneficiaries of life insurance, pensions and the like, you must now do the same with respect to same-sex spouses. If your plans have all been regulated by federal laws, and federal government agencies you would have already had to do so; but if they were regulated in any way by state laws or government agencies, then it would have depended on the laws of the state(s) in which you employed people. So, if you employed people in more than one state, you would have had to be aware of laws in each of those states. You see where that could have been confusing?

OK, we get it. State (and local) and federal agencies must recognize same-sex marriages in the same way they recognize opposite sex marriages. Employers must also do so–and so must employee benefits plans. Let’s look at some specific ways in which this ruling either definitely or most likely impacts employers and employees with respect to benefits. Here are some important ones:

  • While the Affordable Care Act does not require employers to offer benefits to employees’ spouses, many states require insurers to offer health benefits to spouses. Such an offer must now include same-sex spouses.
  • Self-funded medical plans are not always covered by state insurance laws. However, if they are covered by non-discrimination laws and the plan covers opposite-sex spouses, those plans may also have to cover same-sex spouses;
  • The Affordable Care Act does require employers to offer coverage to an employee’s children, which includes adopted children. In many cases, same-sex couples could not adopt a child as a couple; rather one or the other partner could adopt the child individually. At best, the non-adopting partner’s ability to get employer-sponsored health insurance coverage for the child was questionable. Now, same-sex couples should be allowed as a couple to adopt a child, and either spouse should be able to get employer-sponsored coverage for that child. At the very least, children of one same-sex spouse would probably be step-children of the other spouse and employers covered under the Affordable Care Act have to offer coverage to step children.
  • State laws affecting administration of a deceased’s estate will need to recognize same-sex spouses administrators and default heirs (in the event the deceased did not have a will), which in turn will impact benefit plan beneficiaries of plans that incorporate state law.
  • State-conferred benefits for spouses will likely be extended to same-sex spouses.
  • State tax laws regarding employee benefits of same-sex spouses and those of opposite-sex spouses should receive the same tax treatment, which should also mean that federal and state tax law will be in sync — at least in this respect.
  • Same-sex spouses should now have the ability to file domestic relations proceedings (e.g. divorce, custody, etc.), which in turn should allow same-sex spouses to obtain Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDRO’s). A QDRO generally assigns portions of an employees retirement benefits to a current or former spouse or a couple’s children.

There is another, perhaps overlooked impact of Obergefell: It does not require recognition of domestic partnerships. Does that matter in light of the fact that now both same-sex and opposite-sex couples can marry and will be legally recognized as such? Yes, Not all couples marry. Couples who are not married and who, through one of the partners currently have employer-sponsored benefits could see those benefits disappear if an employer decides to rescind those benefits. Employers considering such rescission should make sure to do so with respect to all employees in a domestic partnership and not necessarily only to those in same-sex partnerships. While there is currently no explicit federal law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation (Click here, here and here for more on that topic) many states do have such laws.

We will be seeing and feeling the impact of Obergefell on employee benefits for quite some time. Employers should wait for further guidance from their states — and reach out to competent employment counsel with any questions that cannot wait. In the meantime, we’ll look at Obergefell’s impact on family leave laws next week. See you then.

Disclaimer: This post’s contents are for informational purposes only, are not legal advice and do not create an attorney-client relationship. Always consult with competent employment counsel on any issues discussed here.

Click here to register — and get HRCI credits for the recorded presentation of my webinar on Pre-Employment Screening.

If you want to really be up to date on hot-button employment law topics, with a monthly EmpLAWyerology Alert subscription and learn about upcoming webinars email theemplawyerologist@gmail.com.

Click here to learn more about Janette Levey Frisch, author of The EmpLAWyerologist,, or view The EmpLAWyerologist Firm’s new video clip.

“Like” The EmpLAWyerologist on Facebook, by clicking here.

Share this:

  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Employee Benefits, Sexual orientation discrimination Tagged With: Affordable Care Act and same-sex partner benefits, employee benefits, gay marriage, gay marriage and employee benefits, same-sex marriage, same-sex marriage and employee benefits, same-sex marriage and medical benefits, same-sex marriage and pension benfits, sexual orientation discrimination

Comments

  1. Rosemarie Caputo says

    July 9, 2015 at 8:35 am

    Okay, good.

    Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

    Reply
  2. Parker Daws says

    July 9, 2015 at 10:22 am

    your link for pre-employment screening webinar does not work

    Reply
    • theemplawyerologist says

      July 9, 2015 at 10:27 am

      Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I have updated the post and made sure that a correct, working link is included. If you encounter any other issues with that, please feel free to email me at theemplawyerologist@gmail.com.

      Reply
  3. mikesummitsafety71 says

    July 9, 2015 at 1:45 pm

    A very good summary of this decision and its impact on employee benefits. It’s writing like this that keeps me reading your posts!

    Reply
    • theemplawyerologist says

      July 9, 2015 at 1:47 pm

      Thanks, Mike! Readers like you keep me writing!

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Tags

ADA ADAAA ADEA Americans with Disabilities Act Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act Civil Rights Act of 1964 co-employment disability discrimination Discrimination DOL EEOC employee leave employment discrimination Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Fair Labor Standards Act Family Medical Leave Act FLSA FMLA FMLA interference FMLA retaliation harassment Independent contractor joint employer joint employment National Labor Relations Act National Labor Relations Board NLRA NLRB overtime Pre-Employment Screening reasonable accommodation reasonable accommodations religious discrimination retaliation sex discrimination sexual harassment sexual orientation discrimination Title VII US Department of Labor US Supreme Court wage and hour worker misclassification workplace harassment workplace safety workplace violence

Join Our Community

Join hundreds of other successful professionals and receive monthly updates and alerts regarding must-read employment law updates as well as invitations to our upcoming webinars.

Connect With The EmpLAWyerologist

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Register for this Webinar

How We Can Help

  • Consulting
  • Training
  • Investigations
  • Keynote Speaking
  • Employment Practices Wellness Check-Up

CONTACT US

Law Office of Janette Levey Frisch
"The EmpLAWyerologist" Firm - The Employer's Legal Wellness Professional
300 Carnegie Center Drive - Ste 150
Princeton, NJ 08540
(732) 902-0728
theemplawyerologist.com

All rights reserved. Copyright The Emplawyerologist Firm. Crafted with by 3P Creative Group.

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.