Editorial
© 2007 Philadelphia Gay News

PGN to UPS: BS

For many years, PGN has been a loyal customer of UPS: On Thursdays, PGN is one of the largest, if not the largest, of UPS’ pickups in the city.

As such, we take umbrage at the company’s refusal to grant civil-unioned New Jersey couples domestic-partner benefits, blaming their action on the union, federal regulations and the state’s legislature.

The global shipper’s argument that adding benefits for partners in the middle of a union contract would be illegal based on federal law does not stand up to close scrutiny. The state legislature changed the law in the middle of a six-year contract cycle; if the company changes its policies to comply with the law, legally, it should not be held in breach of the contract.

While we are not suggesting or advocating a national boycott of the shipper by GLBT-owned businesses, businesses that support equal rights and members of our community who are in position to make shipping decisions for their firms at this time, we are urging UPS to comply with the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision, which mandated equal benefits for same-sex couples whether it be “marriage” or “civil unions,” and the intention of the Legislature, which, after the court’s decision, quickly passed the civil-union law.

UPS’ contention that the New Jersey Legislature didn’t mean to give equal rights to same-sex couples because it didn’t use “marriage” also doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Frankly, the move was political. While the general populace is slowly warming to same-sex marriage and equal rights, the vocal conservatives are waging a serious campaign against same-sex “marriage” — and the legislators know this. If they don’t call the rights “marriage,” the rights are more likely to avoid (and withstand) right-wing challenges.

UPS should not hide behind language to discriminate: The intention of the law is well-known, made clear by the court and the legislature. Neither should UPS use civil-union benefits as a bargaining tool in union negotiations: Equality should never be used as a bargaining chip.

This is not to say that UPS generally discriminates; like many Fortune 500 companies, the company includes sexual orientation in its nondiscrimination policy and grants domestic-partner benefits to nonunion workers. Additionally, it grants benefits to the spouses of employees in Massachusetts, the only state where same-sex marriage is legal. But at this point, UPS’ discrimination in New Jersey is pivotal.

Blaming the union contract and federal legislation is a tactic that has been used before to avoid giving benefits (specifically in New Jersey’s Lower Township school district last year). With the civil-union legislation in place, that argument holds less weight.

Though the issue is legally murky, UPS, state officials and the union are continuing this dialogue. With regard to benefits for civil-union couples, it seems that there should be a way for UPS to grant the benefits without the pressure of a lawsuit for breach of contract (and the ensuing litigation costs). The move would also set a precedent for other companies in New Jersey that have refused to comply.

Finally, that UPS is thumbing its nose at New Jersey law should also prompt the state to end its business with UPS until it respects New Jersey law.