Skip to Navigation
University of Pittsburgh
Print This Page Print this pages

March 6, 2003

Nordenberg responds to Temple's awarding of limited same-sex partner health benefits

Chancellor Mark Nordenberg said Temple University’s extension of health benefits to some of its employees’ same-sex partners is “probably a positive thing” but it would not be financially or politically prudent yet for Pitt to follow Temple’s lead.

The chancellor’s first public comments on the Temple action came during the Feb. 20 Pitt Board of Trustees meeting and to reporters afterward.

Nordenberg pledged to support Temple against possible punishment by Pennsylvania lawmakers who oppose same-sex benefits.

Temple is the state’s first publicly funded university to offer any employees such benefits.

“I certainly hope that [Temple’s] funding is not in jeopardy and would work with them to try to protect their state funding streams in any ways that might prove to be useful. And I have offered that help to President [David] Adamany,” the chancellor told reporters.

However, Nordenberg said his administration will continue to be guided by the recommendations of a Pitt special committee that studied the same-sex benefits issue and issued a report last June.

The committee concluded that Pitt eventually should join the growing number of employers that offer such benefits, but that doing so in the face of current state opposition would not be prudent. Pitt should work with Pennsylvania’s three other state-related universities (Penn State, Temple and Lincoln) in lobbying Harrisburg lawmakers to drop their opposition to same-sex benefits, the committee recommended.

Unlike Temple, Nordenberg pointed out, Pitt has been defending itself against a discrimination lawsuit seeking to force Pitt to extend health benefits to its employees’ gay and lesbian partners.

Pitt attorneys have asked Allegheny County Common Pleas Court Judge Robert Gallo to permanently ban the city’s Human Relations Commission from hearing the case. Two years ago, Gallo ruled that Pitt’s health insurance policy does not discriminate against gays and lesbians.

Temple’s agreement to offer health benefits to domestic partners resulted from negotiations with unions representing some 2,100 unionized white-collar employees and graduate students, about 40 percent of the Philadelphia school’s workforce.

Temple will pay health insurance premiums for some heterosexual employees’ partners if the couples meet Pennsylvania’s common-law marriage provisions, but same-sex couples (who do not, by definition, meet the provisions) must pay the premiums themselves.

“Offering health care benefits on the terms that Temple has done would not resolve the claims that have been asserted against us,” Nordenberg told trustees.

“Those claims seek more than access to insurance benefits. They seek an institutional subsidy of those benefits, which is not a part of the Temple plan. In fact, one publicly expressed hope has been that this feature of the plan will help insulate [Temple] from legislative repercussions.”

During the board meeting, Nordenberg observed that “the growing number of Americans who are without health care coverage is a major national problem.

“We obviously are a partner in providing world-class health care to the people of this region. In that sense, the general notion of more expansive health care coverage is very consistent with our institutional mission.”

The following are excerpts from the chancellor’s post-meeting session with the media.

Given Temple’s recent action, why is it still not prudent for Pitt to offer same-sex health benefits?

Nordenberg: “Certainly, that type of plan [that Temple is offering] would not be responsive to the claims that have been made against us.

One of the key recommendations of the [Pitt] special committee, whose work I do respect and whose opinions I take seriously, was that progress on this front was not going to come either through litigation or through public discussions but instead really did depend on constructive, private conversations pushing people’s understandings forward. And so, when we’re prepared to make a more definitive public statement, I guess I’ll make it.

“At this point, as I said during the meeting, we continue to be guided by the recommendations of the special committee. They include the statement that ultimately a majority of major employers will provide these benefits and the University of Pittsburgh ought to be among them — but also that we ought to chart a course that is appropriate for the University both politically and fiscally.”

You’ve said that the best way for the state-related universities to pursue this issue was by working together. Does Temple’s action represent a breaking of the ranks or even a betrayal?

“No, I would not say that at all. I think that Temple and its president have been active partners in exploring the most effective ways to move forward. It simply is the case that each of the [state-related] institutions is different. [Temple] is a campus on which many of these matters are resolved through collective bargaining.

“Clearly, [Temple administrators] have done what they think is best for Temple in taking this step. They’ve acted freely, and it’s probably a positive thing.”

Do you believe that Temple’s state funding is in jeopardy?

“I certainly hope that their funding is not in jeopardy, and would work with them to try to protect their state funding streams in any ways that might prove to be useful. And I have offered that help to President Adamany.”

What sort of help?

“I’ve made a general offer of help to Temple, which I expect he [Adamany] will think about and probably get back to me and suggest ways in which we might be allied with respect to that issue.”

How will the reaction in Harrisburg to Temple’s offering of same-sex health benefits influence Pitt’s position on the issue?

“Clearly, I think that the responses of the legislature to this step taken by Temple will put us in a better position to gauge what the political climate is like in Harrisburg.”

Have you received any feedback from legislators about Temple’s action?

“We are regularly engaged in conversations about any issues that might affect the University, and certainly it does include this issue. But I wouldn’t comment on the substance of those conversations.”

Do you know what Gov. Rendell thinks of what Temple has done?

“I have had conversations with Gov. Rendell and members of his staff and there, too, they are free to express their own opinions.”

Rendell is on record as supporting employee benefits for same-sex partners.

“I’m going to let the governor speak for himself.”

Did he indicate how he would react if Pitt began offering same-sex benefits?

[With a laugh] “If he indicated a reaction like that in a private conversation with me, do you think I would tell you what it was?”

In giving gay and lesbian partners access to health benefits at Temple, President Adamany said it would help his university in competing for top faculty. Is Pitt at a competitive disadvantage in not offering such benefits?

“Again, the most comprehensive look at that question was taken by the special committee, which indicated that we could not quantify those effects [on recruitment], that they might be there, though it was hard to say that it would be a major impact, in their judgment.

“But obviously, the world is changing. This is a more commonly offered benefit. We do function in a competitive environment. And so, that is a factor that we would have to continue to consider as we move forward.”

What point were you making with your comment that increasing the number of people eligible for health benefits is consistent with Pitt’s mission? It could be interpreted as suggesting that it might make sense to extend such benefits to same-sex partners, if for no other reason than giving more people health coverage. If that’s not what you were trying to suggest, what was the point of that statement?

“The point of the statement — and it really is, in a lot of ways, a statement that can stand on its own — is that the absence of health care coverage for increasing numbers of Americans is a real problem.

“And when you look at the numbers, and when you think about the fact that one of the things that this University and the City of Pittsburgh are known for is providing top-quality health care, without even intending to reference particular groups, everybody ought to be concerned about it.”

—Bruce Steele


Leave a Reply