Advocates of workplace equity are hoping that a personnel practice employed by several of the area's largest companies will appeal to Monroe County.

For several months, speakers have been urging the County Legislature to approve domestic-partner benefits (health insurance, sick leave, and pensions, for example) for county workers. Kodak provides them, Xerox provides them, Bausch & Lomb provides them, and so do the University of Rochester and the City of Rochester. Even Monroe Community College, which the county partly funds, provides them. The county, the advocates say, should follow in the footsteps of some of its largest institutions.

"Equity of benefits is a way to show all employees are valued," said Ann Tischer, a former county social worker who now works for ViaHealth. Tischer spoke at the legislature meeting last week.

County officials seem to be taking the push seriously. Republican legislators have met with some of the advocates, who say the officials were open to the suggestion.

"Domestic-partner benefits, to me, is the right thing to do," Legislature President Wayne Zyra told City Newspaper last week. Zyra is an MCC board member and was on the board when the college took on the domestic-partner benefits issue. At the college, the change had a minimal impact on costs, he said.

For the county, the benefits could be discussed as part of union contract negotiations or possibly through personnel policies, Zyra said.

Speaking at last week's legislature meeting, Paul Scott, president of the Mary Cariola Children's Center, said his organization addressed the issue 10 years ago. Center officials felt that a stable home life benefited its employees and by extension the Center, he said. And one way to help foster a stable home life, he said, is to provide the same benefits to unmarried employees' live-in partners that are provided to other employees' spouses.

Mary Cariola employees must prove a relationship of six months or longer with their partner and prove that they share financial responsibilities. While 10 to 15 percent of the Center's employees were likely eligible, about 2 percent took advantage of the benefits, Scott said.

Those involved in the local push note that the issue isn't limited to same-sex partners. Unmarried heterosexual couples could benefit from a change to the policy as well. Heterosexual couples use the benefit more often than same-sex couples, says Tom Privitere, Western New York field services director for the state Public Employees Federation.

More than 373,000 state employees are eligible for health-insurance benefits, Privitere said in an interview. State union contracts contain a domestic-partner benefits provision, and 3,494 employees use it. Of those, 863 employees, or less than 1 percent, are same-sex couples, he said.

In the Rochester City School District, 16 of the 5,316 eligible employees use domestic-partner benefits, he said. Two of them have a same-sex partner.

In an interview, Ann Tischer and her partner, Bess Watts, said that domestic-partner benefits are not just a civil rights issue; they're a crucial workplace issue.

When Tischer's mother died, Watts had to use vacation time instead of bereavement time. And when Tischer had surgery, Watts again had to use vacation time. Watts works at MCC, and policy changes have since been negotiated in union contracts at the college.

But Watts said those experiences made her feel less valued as an employee. "If the employer doesn't treat you well, how are you going to treat the employer?" she said.

Twenty percent of same-sex couples are uninsured, said Tischer. If they get sick, they often have to rely on Medicaid or default on loans or other financial obligations.

"It's a critical issue when you're talking about health insurance," she said.